That is a great question, which is often overlooked. The serpent in the Garden of Eden was not a literal snake or lizard, but what was it? It is a fallen Seraph, the same species as the Cherubim. This view is based on several factors, so lets take a look at these.
One point is the serpent’s ability to speak and reason, suggesting a higher intelligence. Later biblical references to a satan (meaning accuser) as “that ancient serpent”, see Revelation 12:9. The description of an accuser as having been in Eden and as an anointed cherub, which you can find in Ezekiel 28:13-14. Calling a creature a seraph references the species or the body of the creature while calling it a Cherub is more of a job title, as this literally means throne guardian.
I want to explain the whole Seraphim concept and its connections to dragon myths, and then I will discuss the interpretation of the serpent in the Garden of Eden as a seraph. Here’s a clear overview: The term “seraph” (the singular of “seraphim”) in Hebrew can be translated as either “burning ones” or “fiery serpents.” This association stems from the root word “saraph,” meaning “to burn.” In biblical descriptions, seraphim are portrayed as six-winged angelic beings.
The fiery, serpentine nature of seraphim bears similarities to dragon myths found in various cultures. Western dragons are often depicted as winged, fire-breathing serpents. Eastern dragons are however usually wingless, but associated with wisdom. Quite often are depicted with tendrils, I’ll explain that in a moment. The Mesoamerican equivalent to dragons are feathered and winged serpentine deities like Quetzalcoatl.
The artistic depictions of these tendril features bear a striking resemblance to stylized flames, with their undulating, wispy appearance. The tendrils often flow and curl in a manner reminiscent of smoke or fire, creating a sense of dynamic energy around the dragon’s form. This fiery aspect of their appearance connects Eastern dragons to their Western counterparts, known for breathing fire. The consistent feature of flames surrounding these dragons can be seen as a subtle nod to the creature’s power and their ability to move between elemental realms. After all, they are supernatural creatures, specifically angels.
In some interpretations, these tendrils on Eastern dragons represent a visual manifestation of the dragon’s qi or life force, which in Chinese philosophy is often associated with vitality and sometimes depicted as a kind of ethereal flame. Similarly, biblical angels are frequently described as beings of intense light or fire. The book of Ezekiel, for instance, portrays celestial beings with an appearance “like burning coals of fire” and “like torches.” The seraphim, whose name literally means “burning ones,” are described as fiery, radiant entities. This brilliant, fiery aspect of angels signifies their divine nature and their role as bearers of God’s presence and power. Both these concepts – the eastern dragon’s qi and the angel’s radiance – serve to set these beings apart from the mundane world.
One big difference between eastern and western dragons is the wings. Biblical seraphim are described as having six wings: two covering their faces, two covering their feet, and two used for flying. This multi-winged appearance sets them apart from typical dragon depictions but aligns with their status as celestial beings.
The generally less aggressive nature of the generally un-winged Eastern dragons likely indicates their lowered state. In Hindu and Buddhist traditions, Nagas are semi-divine beings, often depicted as great serpents or as half-human, half-serpent creatures. Unlike the fearsome dragons of Western lore, Nagas are typically associated with wisdom, protection, and the guardianship of treasures, both material and spiritual. They are known for their ability to shapeshift, often appearing in human form to interact with and teach humans. This shape-shifting trait does appear in angels, fallen and otherwise.
This role as bringers of knowledge and civilization bears a striking resemblance to certain interpretations of the serpent in Eden, viewed not as a simple tempter but as a conveyor of forbidden knowledge. The Nagas’ benevolent interaction with humans, particularly in imparting wisdom, draws an interesting parallel to the narrative of the fallen angels in the Book of Enoch. This book describes a group of angels descending to Earth and began to interact with humans, teaching them various arts and sciences. These included metallurgy, cosmetics, sorcery, and astronomy – knowledge that was seen as beyond what humans were meant to possess, much like the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.One thing about the Nagas is that they do not have wings. Which is interesting as God cursed their ancestor to crawl on its belly.
Why did the serpent choose to tempt Eve?
Many people don’t consider an important point, of all creation, and Adam the priest king over it all, why did this fallen entity choose to tempt Eve? The earth was there when God created the plants, and the plants were there when God created animals, who saw God create Adam with their own eyes. Adam may have been asleep, but he experienced the before and after of God creating Eve, and had some knowledge of how it happened. Eve never saw God create anything. This could have put Eve at a weaker faith than all of the rest of creation. However, this is not all, check out these two verses.
In Genesis 3:6 we see the following, “When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took some of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband with her, and he ate.”
Then in 5:12 we see this, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned”
Sin entered through one man, but it was even him that listened to the serpent. Right? It was Adam’s job to look after his wife. He should have stepped in when she was being lead astray, especially considering that he was standing there the whole time. Did Eve go and get Adam, or just hand him some fruit? He was there the entire time. He should have also defended the scriptures when she and the serpent misquoted God.
What did God say?
Did god really say that they would surely die if they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?
In Genesis 3:1-5, the dialogue between the serpent and Eve contains several subtleties and shifts that reveal wordplay and misquoting of God’s original command. God’s initial command to Adam and Eve was clear: they could freely eat from any tree in the garden except for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God warned that eating from this tree would result in certain death. This command emphasized both the freedom they had and the serious consequence of disobedience.
The serpent begins the deception by exaggerating God’s command. It asks Eve if God had really said they could not eat from any tree in the garden, implying that God’s command was overly restrictive. This misquotation is designed to create confusion and to cast doubt on God’s generosity. In her response, Eve corrects the serpent but also adds to God’s command by saying they must not touch the forbidden tree, a detail that was not part of the original directive. This addition suggests either a misunderstanding or an extra precaution on Eve’s part, but it still distorts the original command. We see later, like in the New Testament, how God feels about adding on extra rules to his word.
A crucial part of the serpent’s deception involves the wordplay on the Hebrew terms for “immediately dying” and “being dying” or “dying you will die”. God’s original warning implied certain and immediate death as a consequence of eating the fruit. The serpent, however, manipulates this by assuring Eve, “You surely will not die”. This phrase introduces doubt by suggesting that the death God spoke of would not be immediate or certain, effectively softening the perceived severity of the consequence.
The serpent might contend that its language was intentionally ambiguous and open to interpretation. By saying, “You will not certainly die,” it could argue it left room for different understandings of “death.” The serpent might claim it referred to physical death, while God’s warning included spiritual death or separation from God. Since Adam and Eve did not die physically on the day they ate the fruit but experienced spiritual death and eventual physical death, the serpent might argue it did not mislead them about an immediate physical demise and was truthful in the short term.
The serpent then further entices Eve by suggesting that eating the fruit will open their eyes and make them like God, knowing good and evil. This claim mixes truth with deception: while it is true that their eyes would be opened, the serpent misleadingly implies that God’s prohibition was meant to prevent them from attaining divine wisdom. By introducing doubt about God’s motives, the serpent effectively undermines God’s authority and sows seeds of distrust.
These subtle shifts in language and meaning, especially the wordplay on the terms of death, play a crucial role in the narrative. The serpent’s strategy of creating confusion, contradicting God’s word, and suggesting an ulterior motive behind God’s command leads to Eve’s decision to eat the forbidden fruit. This act of disobedience, influenced by the serpent’s manipulation, sets the stage for the subsequent fall of humanity.
If you think that’s bad, this is just one angelic being talking to a human woman. Wait until you see what happens when 200 of them come to earth to mate with human women and raise children. Check the details for that. For now, don’t forget to like and subscribe, and have a bless’d day.