Why didn’t Adam and Eve find it strange that a serpent was talking to them?
Interestingly, the serpent/snake speaking to Adam and Eve is not the only instance in the Bible where an animal speaks. The prophet Balaam was rebuked by his donkey (see Numbers 22:21-35). We have to remember that while animals are not capable of speaking, there are powerful beings out there (God, the angels, Satan, the demons) who are capable of the impossible, including enabling animals to speak. Most scholars hold that it was Satan in the Garden of Eden who was speaking through the snake, not the snake itself speaking on its own. Thus, the Genesis 3 account it is not suggesting that snakes were of an intellect that would have enabled them to speak coherently.
Still, why didn’t Adam and Eve find it strange that an animal was speaking to them? It is unlikely that Adam and Eve had the same perspective we do on animals. In our era, we know from experience that animals are incapable of speech on the same level as humans. Adam and Eve did not have a childhood, nor did they have other humans to learn from. Given that Adam and Eve had probably only been alive a matter of days, it is not unreasonable for them to believe that animals were capable of speech. It is also possible that this was not the first talking animal Adam and Eve had encountered. Perhaps Satan or even God Himself had used animals to communicate with Adam and Eve before. There are so few details given in the account that much is left to speculation and presumption.
Lastly, it was not unreasonable for Eve to answer the snake. After all, the snake was evidently speaking in a language that she understood and asking an intelligible question. It is also likely that Adam was nearby and could verify that she was not imagining things. It was not the serpent speaking that should have alarmed them. Rather, it was the fact that he was causing them to doubt God’s instructions (Genesis 3:1), contradicting God (Genesis 3:4), and calling God’s motives into question (Genesis 3:5). That should have been enough to cause both Eve and Adam to stop talking to the serpent.
Did the Israelites in the book of Exodus cross the Red Sea or the Reed Sea?
Moses’ song of praise after the crossing of the Red Sea contains this line: “Pharaoh’s chariots and his army he has hurled into the sea. The best of Pharaoh’s officers are drowned in the Red Sea” (Exodus 15:4). This is one of over twenty Old Testament verses dealing with the Exodus that mention the Red Sea. There has always been a question, though, about the accuracy of translating these verses with “Red Sea” instead of “Reed Sea.”
The Hebrew word suph, whose root is thought to be of Egyptian origin, meant “reed,” especially the papyrus. So the Hebrew phrase yam suph can be translated “Sea of Reeds” or “Reed Sea” or even “Papyrus Marsh.” Is this phrase, commonly translated “Red Sea,” in fact referring to what today is known as the Red Sea or is it some other body of water? More importantly, are the liberal scholars correct in saying yam suph refers to a marshy area near the Rea Sea or some small, shallow lake nearby? These questions are crucial because, if the Israelites escaped Egypt without God’s miraculous intervention, then the Bible contains exaggerations and lies.
When we look at the various passages of Scripture where the term yam suph is used, it becomes clear that it is indeed referring to the large body of water: “The waters were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left” (Exodus 14:21–22). The “wall of water” on each side of the Israelites certainly suggests depth. Later, “the sea went back to its place. . . . The water flowed back and covered the chariots and horsemen—the entire army of Pharaoh that had followed the Israelites into the sea. Not one of them survived” (verses 27–28). There can be no doubt about what Moses is communicating here. Red Sea or Reed Sea, it was deep enough to destroy the entire Egyptian army. All the credit for this miraculous event is given to the Lord (Exodus 15:3), and it is referenced often in Scripture as an example of God’s great power (Joshua 2:10; Nehemiah 9:9; Psalm 106:9–12; 136:13–14).
Exodus 14 clearly describes a supernatural event involving a deep body of water that Israel crossed on dry ground and that later drowned the Egyptians. Whether the Israelites called it the Red Sea or the Reed Sea, the only way to look at that chapter and see a shallow lake or marshy area is to have a preconceived bias against the miraculous. Exodus gives us a clear understanding that the body of water the Israelites crossed was large and deep. The Red Sea surely fits that description.
In support of “Red Sea” being the correct translation and the correct body of water is the Greek Septuagint (LXX) from 200 BC. This is the earliest translation of the Hebrew Bible known, and the words yam suph are consistently translated with the Greek words eruthros thalassa or “Red Sea” (see Acts 7:36; Hebrews 11:29). In Exodus 2:3 and 5, the translators of the LXX used hélos to refer to a marshy, reedy area. But when it came time to translate suph in the context of the exodus through the sea, they chose a different phrase (eruthros thalassa), which specifically means “Red Sea.” The translators of the LXX obviously understood Moses to be referring to the Red Sea, not some other body of water.
When the LXX is quoted in the New Testament, the biblical writers, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, retained the Greek words meaning “Red Sea” (not “Reed Sea”). One example is in Stephen’s sermon in Acts 7:36. Also, Hebrews 11:29 says, “By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians tried to do so, they were drowned.” These New Testament passages provide strong proof that “Red Sea” is the correct translation.
Further evidence that yam suph can indeed refer to the Red Sea comes from 1 Kings 9:26. There we see King Solomon building a fleet of ships on the shore of the Rea Sea/Reed Sea in the land of Edom—hardly practical if that body of water were merely a marshy area or small, shallow lake.
Even if we choose the translation “Reed Sea” over “Red Sea,” there are several possible bodies of water near Egypt that the Israelites could have crossed. Some scholars point to the Gulf of Suez or the Gulf of Aqaba (both are extensions of the Red Sea) as possible crossing sites. Moving north of the Gulf of Suez is the Bitter Lakes region, and north of that is Lake Timsah. Other scholars have suggested a body of water in the Nile Delta region.
Regardless of the way the words yam suph are translated, the Bible is clear that God supernaturally parted a large body of water so the Israelites could cross on dry land, and, when the Egyptian army attempted to follow, He destroyed them in an overwhelming flood.
What did the Law mean when it referred to a lasting ordinance / statute forever?
The phrase “lasting ordinance” is used 25 times in the NIV Old Testament, almost exclusively in the Books of Moses. The word translated “lasting” is the Hebrew olam, meaning “forever” or “for a long time.” In other words, a lasting ordinance referred to an ongoing command.
The first mention of a “lasting ordinance” is found in Exodus 12:14: “This is a day you are to commemorate; for the generations to come you shall celebrate it as a festival to the LORD—a lasting ordinance.” This command is in reference to the first Passover. That feast would become a yearly tradition practiced from that time forward. Instead of a one-time event, the Passover was to be a lasting ordinance.
In addition to the Passover, the ongoing burning of lamps in the tabernacle was to be a lasting ordinance, according to Exodus 27:21. The lamps in the tabernacle did not last forever, as the tabernacle would later be replaced by Solomon’s temple, and that was later destroyed. The idea behind a “lasting ordinance” was that the law would be ongoing rather than just for one occasion.
The Levitical priesthood of Aaron and his sons is also listed as a lasting ordinance (Exodus 29:9), as was the command for them to wash before entering the tent of meeting (Exodus 30:20–22). In Leviticus, lasting ordinances include not eating the fat or blood (Leviticus 3:17), priests abstaining from alcohol (Leviticus 10:9), the yearly Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16), sacrifices only brought to the priests at the tabernacle (Leviticus 17:1–7), the yearly Jewish festivals (Leviticus 23), and lamps, olive oil, and bread before the Lord in the tabernacle (Leviticus 24:1–9).
In Numbers, more lasting ordinances are mentioned: the blowing of trumpets when the community was to move (Numbers 10:1–10), offerings (Numbers 15:15), the call for Levites to oversee the work of the tabernacle (Numbers 18), and rules related to ritual cleansing (Numbers 19).
Outside of these books, only two passages mention a “lasting ordinance.” In 2 Chronicles 2:4 a lasting ordinance is made concerning moving the tabernacle worship to the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. Then, in Ezekiel 46:14 a lasting ordinance is given related to a future temple prophesied by the prophet Ezekiel (usually called the Millennial Temple).
As these passages note, the idea of a lasting ordinance indicated an ongoing law, but it was not always intended to be eternal. In addition, the lasting ordinances of the Bible are related to the tabernacle, temple, and worship practices of the children of Israel. The first and perhaps most well-known of these practices was the Passover, the lasting ordinance that marked the new beginning for the Israelites. All of these lasting ordinances were commanded by God to the people of God as ways to obey and honor Him.
What is the significance of David saying, “You prepare a table before me” (Psalm 23:5)?
In Psalm 23:5, King David says to the Lord, “You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies,” Portraying his close relationship to God as an honored dinner guest of a generous and capable host. As a gracious host, the Lord attends to David’s every need, showering him with personal care, abundant goodness, protection from his enemies, and eternal blessings.
David had many adversaries, but in the presence of the Lord, seated at His table, they posed no threat because David had guest-rights with the Lord. In the ancient East, a host was obligated to safeguard his visitors from all enemies at all costs.
Psalm 23 begins, “The LORD is my shepherd, I lack nothing.” The psalm’s central theme—that David lacks nothing—is reinforced through every line. The word my underscores the intimacy of David’s up-close relationship with God. David acknowledges that God is always with Him, looking out for his good, even in the darkest “valley of the shadow of death” (verse 4). Even in the most challenging circumstances—“in the presence of my enemies” (verse 5)—David lacks nothing because His God is with him, supplying his every need and looking out for his welfare.
David’s assertion, “You prepare a table before me,” is equivalent to Paul’s declaration, “And my God will meet all your needs according to the riches of his glory in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:19). This theme of God’s constant provision and protection echoes in Paul’s prayer for the Ephesians: “I pray that from his glorious, unlimited resources he will empower you with inner strength through his Spirit. Then Christ will make his home in your hearts as you trust in him. Your roots will grow down into God’s love and keep you strong. And may you have the power to understand, as all God’s people should, how wide, how long, how high, and how deep his love is. May you experience the love of Christ, though it is too great to understand fully. Then you will be made complete with all the fullness of life and power that comes from God” (Ephesians 3:16–19, NLT).
When we are invited to someone’s house for dinner, we cannot open the host’s refrigerator and grab whatever we want to eat. We depend on the host to place dinner on the table for us. We wait to be offered food and drink. Thus, the statement, “You prepare a table before me,” highlights David’s dependence on God.
The same God who “spread a table in the wilderness” for the children of Israel by providing daily manna for them to eat (Exodus 16:15; cf. Psalm 78:19) would supply all the provisions and help King David would need. David’s confidence in God dovetails with the encouragement in Hebrews 4:16: “So let us come boldly to the throne of our gracious God. There we will receive his mercy, and we will find grace to help us when we need it most” (NLT).
God (the Host) welcomes His guest (David) to a feast already prepared and spread out for him on the table. As it was for David, it is for all believers who accept the invitation to dine at the Lord’s table (Isaiah 25:6–9; Matthew 22:1–14; Luke 13:29–30; Revelation 19:9; 21:2–4). Like David, we depend on God to provide our material and physical needs (Psalm 104:27); we lean on Him for understanding and direction in life (Proverbs 3:5–6); we rest in Him through prayer (Philippians 4:6; 1 Peter 5:7); and, most importantly, we depend on God for our salvation (Ephesians 2:8–9).
You prepare a table before me means God’s “divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness” (2 Peter 1:3). Yet it’s not only in this life that God meets our needs. God is our gracious and bountiful benefactor for both our bodies and souls for all time and eternity.
Yes, the serpent in Genesis chapter 3 was Satan. Satan was either appearing as a serpent, possessing the serpent, or deceiving Adam and Eve into believing that it was the serpent who was talking to them. Serpents / snakes do not possess the ability to speak. Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 both describe Satan as a serpent. “He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years” (Revelation 20:2). “The great dragon was hurled down, that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him” (Revelation 12:9).
While the Bible is not clear as to whether or not the serpent stood up or walked before the curse, it appears likely that, like other reptiles, it probably did walk on four legs. That would seem to be the best explanation of Genesis 3:14, “So the LORD God said to the serpent, ‘Because you have done this, cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.'” The fact that the serpent was cursed to crawl on his belly and eat the dust of the earth forever is also a way of indicating that the serpent would be forever despised and looked upon as a vile and despicable creature and an object of scorn and contempt.
Why did God curse the serpent when He knew that it was actually Satan who had led Adam and Eve into sin? The fate of the serpent is an illustration. The curse of the serpent will one day be the fate of Satan himself (Revelation 20:10; Ezekiel 28:18-19).
Eden, of course, is the Garden of Eden where Adam and Eve enjoyed creation perfectly as God had created it. A location “east of Eden” is mentioned in Genesis 3.
After Adam and Eve sinned, they were expelled from the garden. “So the Lord God banished him [mankind—both Adam and Eve] from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life” (Genesis 3:23–24). Presumably, the only entrance to the garden was on the east side, as this was the only side that God chose to guard. If Adam and Eve left the garden on the eastern side and kept going in that direction, they were living east of Eden.
We are not told, but it is reasonable to assume that Adam and Eve as well as their children knew where the Garden of Eden was and that it may have still existed in some form through their lifetimes. If this were not the case, it would have been unnecessary for God to guard the entrance to it and bar access to the tree of life.
The phrase east of Eden also shows up in Genesis 4. After Cain was given his punishment for killing his brother, Abel, he “went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden” (Genesis 4:16). It seems that Nod was even farther away from Eden than his parents had settled. This is the result of the fall intensified.
These are the only two passages where a place “east of Eden” is mentioned. However, in both cases the context is one of denied access to Eden as a result of sin. Living “east of Eden” is contrasted to living “in Eden” and as such is a metaphor for living in a fallen world.
The phrase east of Eden has come into popular usage due to the novel of that name by John Steinbeck and the film based on the novel. In the novel, two families compete and experience the full range of fallen human nature. The film is based on the final part of the novel in which rival brothers vie for their father’s affection. The environment of sin, disappointment, and hopelessness portrayed in these works is an accurate representation of the human condition “east of Eden.”
When the new heavens and new earth are the abode of all who have had their sins forgiven by the sacrifice of Christ, the whole world will be Eden. Access to the tree of life will once again be restored:
“Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 22:1–5).
he biblical passages regarding the flood make it clear that it was global. Genesis 7:11 states that “all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.” Genesis 1:6-7 and 2:6 tell us that the pre-flood environment was much different from that which we experience today. Based on these and other biblical descriptions, it is reasonably speculated that at one time the earth was covered by some kind of water canopy. This canopy could have been a vapor canopy, or it might have consisted of rings, somewhat like Saturn’s ice rings. This, in combination with a layer of water underground, released upon the land (Genesis 2:6) would have resulted in a global flood.
The clearest verses that show the extent of the flood are Genesis 7:19-23. Regarding the waters, “They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. Every living thing that moved on the earth perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.”
In the above passage, we not only find the word “all” being used repeatedly, but we also find “all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered,” “the waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet,“ and “every living thing that moved on the earth perished.” These descriptions clearly describe a universal flood covering the whole earth. Also, if the flood was localized, why did God instruct Noah to build an ark instead of merely telling Noah to move and causing the animals to migrate? And why did He instruct Noah to build an ark large enough to house all of the different kinds of land animals found on the earth? If the flood was not global, there would have been no need for an ark.
Peter also describes the universality of the flood in 2 Peter 3:6-7, where he states, “By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” In these verses Peter compares the “universal” coming judgment to the flood of Noah’s time and states that the world that existed then was flooded with water. Further, many biblical writers accepted the historicity of the worldwide flood (Isaiah 54:9; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5; Hebrews 11:7). Lastly, the Lord Jesus Christ believed in the universal flood and took it as the type of the coming destruction of the world when He returns (Matthew 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27).
There are many extra-biblical evidences that point to a worldwide catastrophe such as a global flood. There are vast fossil graveyards found on every continent and large amounts of coal deposits that would require the rapid covering of vast quantities of vegetation. Oceanic fossils are found upon mountain tops around the world. Cultures in all parts of the world have some form of flood legend. All of these facts and many others are evidence of a global flood.
Was Adam and Eve’s sin really about eating a piece of forbidden fruit?
The phrase “forbidden fruit” refers to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. They were forbidden by God to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:9; 3:2). The Bible says nothing about what type of fruit it was. Tradition has identified it as an apple, but it is impossible to know with certainty what kind of fruit it was. From the text of Genesis, every indication is of a literal tree with a literal fruit.
The key element in the passage is not the fruit itself, but the prohibition against eating it. God gave Adam and Eve only one prohibition in His instructions. Whether there was some spiritual property within the fruit is really irrelevant. The sin was in disobeying God’s command. By eating the fruit (an act of disobedience), Adam and Eve gained personal knowledge of evil. They already knew good, but now they had the contrasting experience of the evil of disobedience and the guilt and shame that came with it. Satan’s lie was that knowing good and evil would make them like gods (Genesis 3:5). In reality, they were already made in the image of God and had the blessing of His good pleasure.
The lesson for us today is that when God prohibits something, it is for our own good. Disobeying Him, going our own way, or deciding for ourselves what is and is not beneficial to us will always lead to disaster. Our heavenly Father who created us knows what is best for us, and when He prohibits something, we should listen to Him. When we choose to obey our own wills instead of His perfect and holy will, things never go well for us. Adam and Eve made that sad discovery after eating the forbidden fruit, and mankind has suffered the consequences of their decision ever since (Romans 5:12).
The tree of life, mentioned in the books of Genesis and Revelation, is a life-giving tree created to enhance and perpetually sustain the physical life of humanity. The tree was planted by God in the Garden of Eden: “The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis 2:9). The centrally located tree of life would have been easily accessible to Adam and Eve from any point in the garden.
More details concerning the tree of life come after Adam and Eve’s sin: “The LORD God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever’” (Genesis 3:22). In his disobedience, Adam lost his eternal life. The tree of life in Eden must have had some role to play in maintaining the life of Adam and Eve (and possibly the animals). Adam would “live forever,” even in his fallen condition, if he had eaten the tree of life after his sin. God placed a sword-wielding cherub at the entrance to the garden specifically “to guard the way to the tree of life” (verse 24). It seems access to the tree of life would have prolonged Adam’s physical life indefinitely, dooming him to an eternity in a cursed world.
It was a mercy that God kept us from the tree of life. By barring access to the tree of life, God showed compassion in His omniscience. Knowing that, because of sin, earthly life would be filled with sorrow and toil, God graciously limited the number of years men would live. To live eternally in a sinful state would mean endless agony for humanity, with no hope of the relief that comes with death. By limiting our lifespan, God gives us enough time to come to know Him and His provision for eternal life through Christ but spares us the misery of an endless existence in a sinful condition.
In His great love, God provided One who would redeem fallen mankind. Through one man, Adam, sin entered the world, but through another Man, Jesus Christ, redemption through the forgiveness of sin is available to all (Romans 5:17). Those who avail themselves of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross will be resurrected to see the tree of life again, for it stands in the middle of the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, where it bears “twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:2). In the eternal state, the curse will be no more (verse 3), access to the tree of life will be reinstated, and darkness will be forever banished (verse 5). Eden will be restored.
In Genesis 3, God pronounces judgment against Adam, Eve, and the serpent for their sinful rebellion. To the serpent, God says, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (verse 15, KJV). This verse is known as the protoevangelium, or the “first gospel,” because it introduces the theme of a Savior who will redeem humanity from the curse of sin (Galatians 3:13). In Genesis 3, the Savior is called the “Seed” of the woman (NKJV and AMP).
The Hebrew word for “seed” here means “offspring,” which is how many translations render it (e.g., NIV, ESV, CSB). The figurative language in Genesis 3:14 (“dust you shall eat,” ESV) indicates that the subsequent verse speaks of a spiritual war between Satan (the serpent) and humanity (the seed of the woman).
The woman spoken of is Eve, the mother of humanity (Genesis 3:20). The prophecy is that her offspring would be continually harassed by Satan and his followers (the offspring of the serpent). Sin entered the world through Adam’s disobedience, and we all suffer because of it (Romans 5:12–14). The perpetual war Satan wages against humanity began in the Garden of Eden.
There is an indication of number in Genesis 3:15 that we cannot overlook. The woman’s offspring is referred to by the singular noun seed, and that seed is immediately antecedent to the singular pronouns he and his. So, the seed of the woman is individualized. There is one Seed in particular who is to come. The sole tempter will be countered by the sole Savior.
Also, Genesis 3:15 speaks of the seed of a woman rather than the seed of a man. This unusual wording could indicate that the woman’s offspring would not have an earthly father. In that case, the protoevangelium is certainly fulfilled in Jesus Christ, who was begotten of the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin (Luke 1:34–35).
The enmity spoken of in Genesis 3:15 is ultimately between Satan and Christ. Satan “bruised the heel” of the Savior when Jesus was crucified—Jesus suffered in His flesh. But the story does not end there. On the third day, Jesus rose from the grave. In so doing, He crushed the power of Satan, sin, and death—He crushed the serpent’s head. Jesus is the Seed of the woman who has won the victory over the tempter and enemy of mankind. And, to His eternal praise, He grants victory to everyone who believes in Him (John 16:33). “To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne” (Revelation 3:21).
