On the crafty serpent of Genesis 3

While Christians traditionally associate the Edenic serpent with Satan or a demonic character, many OT scholars have pointed out that this comes from later interpretation and fits only awkwardly in the narrative of Genesis 3. Some have pointed out that it would be at cross-purposes with the trajectory of the narrative to have evil-personified already in the garden even before the first human sin. So, some OT scholars simply argue that the serpent has no ill-will or evil motive. While I appreciate the narrative-focus and I respect the due circumspection, I have been unsatified with leaving the serpent as an innocent conversation partner.

Recently I read a different view put forward by Bill Arnold. He hypothesizes (acknowledging a serious lack of concrete evidence, but appreciating any theory that may fit the context) the serpent may have been the pinnacle of the animal-creation process (3:1a) in search of a suitable helper for Adam. “Since the serpent was “more crafty” than all the rest, he must have been the most likely candidate as a helping partner for the man, which may further explain the serpent’s ability to speak, reason, and engage the woman in dialogue (she did not seem surprised). As the animal most like the man and therefore the best candidate as his companion, the serpent may therefore be motivated by resentment of the woman” (pp. 63-4). This may be, Arnold wonders, why the serpent approaches the woman first, in hopes of “proving” his superiority to her.

Again, we don’t have a lot of clues to know what the make of this, but I certainly think it answers a lot of questions.

See Genesis (New Cambridge Bible Commentary)