If the Bible is metaphorical then perhaps so is the God of the Bible

Perhaps we can see how you arrived at this conclusion?

When Jesus Christ became real to me I definitely was not a Bible reader. At first I read some theology books to get help. They were too difficult to understand. And I did not have a foundation of familiarity with Scripture to understand what was being said.One day the thought came to me "Why don't you read the Bible?" I decided that since I had humbled myself to call on the name of Jesus, I supposed I could also humble myself to read the Bible.I began to read a paraphrase New Testament which was popular at that time called "Good News For Modern Man". It was my confidence in Jesus which was my gateway for getting into other books of the Old Testament. I noticed that Jesus took them seriously. And since I trusted His integrity without question, I reasoned that if it was good enough for Jesus it must be Okay. He spoke of Noah. He spoke of Abel. He spoke of Lot. He spoke of Genesis. Since Jesus took it seriously I decided I should read it.To make a long story short (if it is not too late) here is an example of where Jesus took Genesis seriously. Jesus was rebuking the opposing Jews. By this time I could see that "the father" of lies who was a murderer and a liar from the beginning should refer back to the serpent in Genesis three. That was the first recorded lie in history. That is when the serpent told Adam and Eve that they would not surely die if they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.With this interpretation from Jesus that the originator of the lies was the Devil, it had to mean that the Devil was involved with the talking serpent.I found no reason to assume that Jesus regarded early Genesis as not historical. Elsewhere He refered to Abel's death. Elsewhere He refered to the purpose of marriage from the beginning, and quoted Genesis.It was my unwavering respect for Jesus that convinced me that if He took early Genesis seriously, then it was Okay for me to do so also. The integrity of Jesus was and still is without dispute to me.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

'By this time I could see that "the father" of lies who was a murderer and a liar from the beginning should refer back to the serpent in Genesis three.'So in your view, the serpent represents the Devil, and the story is an allegory, not literal fact.

I believe it is history with allegorical significance.For example - the ark of Noah,the Passover Lamb, the ark of the covenant, the manna which fell from the sky, the water which poured out of a rock, the tabernacle, the lampstands, the incense altar, the precious stones on the breast plate of the priest, the animals sacrificed in the consecreation offering, the sin offering, the peace offering, the meal offering, and the trespass offering, etc.These were all historical artifacts which also had profound spiritual significance or allegorical significance.I do not think it is a dichotomy in which it is either / or.Adam himself was historical yet also a type of Christ, "the last Adam" or the "second man".Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

History with allegorical significance? Then a real snake did speak?Yo-yo theology, or what?

I think if you have problems with the miracle there are some other important things which you could consider first.Satan approached man through the weaker vessel of the female. (That was weaKER vessel, not weak vessel). If there is objection someone can propose a reason why the enemy of God did not first approach the husband.The serpent's first attack on man was to question God's word. He did not assault it directly. He asked the question "Did God really say ...?"Satan was very subtle - "Did God really say, You must not eat of any tree of the garden?" (Gen. 3:1). The divine command was that any tree could be eaten from except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.To discredit the words of God was the first tactic of Satan. To question that God has spoken and put doubt in man's mind is the first line of attack even today. Often times this happens with a subtle twist to what was spoken.When Eve entertained the question, then the Devil went on to discredit God Himself. After discrediting God's word the Devil went on to discredit God's character. He planted the thought in man's mind that God was witholding some good thing from man."You will not surely die .... For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (v.4-5)Satan made God out to be an arbitrary tyrant who is unreasonably keeping man in a lower position. He slandered God's motives to portray God as an despot who for no reason was not allowing Adam and Eve to rise to their true potential.Satan's slander wanted to give a false impression of God's character. The human Creator is loving and gracious. Satan loves to plant the thought in people's minds that His word is to be discredited and His character and motive are those of a arbitrary despot, wanting only to subjegate man disallowing humans to reach their truest postential.The trust of the serpent's lies was to cause man to not depend on their Creator. They would be able, they thought, to gain enough knowledge to make the eternal God absolete. They would no longer need God, so they thought.This was exactly the temptation which consumed the creature who became Satan:"I will make myself like the Most High" (Isaiah 14:14)So the the alien voice spoke to man, in essence: "This position of subjection and dependence that you're in isn't worthy of you. You're capable of a higher destiny. Reach up and reach out for knolwedge that will set you free from this slavish dependence pm your Creator."I would consider some of these points and not immediately get stumped on the matter that a serpent spoke. I would pay attention to what was being said and what lay behind it in light of the whole revelation of the Bible. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The writer of Genesis seems capable of technical detail and profound historical specifics. For instance the table of nations as to what ethnic portions of humankind spread out and where in Genesis chapter 10.It doesn't seem like the author was given to the frivolous mythology which could not possibly be accurate. And the detail of the construction of the tabernacle and all the matters related to the Levitical priesthood suggest that Moses was very intellgent and faithful.To account for both specimens of data in one book I would have to concoct some multple author theory. Then there is the problem of who would meash so wildly different styles of history telling together ? If they know the table of nations was valid but not the serpent story, why wouldn't they make the serpent story more like a poem of more obviously mythological ?Either God told him what to write about Adam and Eve or he passed on faithfully a tradition handed down to him probably through a godly line of ancestors. Or perhaps he just knew the details by revelation. I don't know. But all in all it is difficult for me to dismiss the account in light of the flavor of so much else written in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus.He certainly doesn't beg anyone to believe. Like most of the rest of the Bible it is spoken in a matter of fact way. You take it or you don't.The evidence to me is that Christ and His Apostle took the account seriously. So I do.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

'The writer of Genesis seems capable of technical detail'So where is the technical detail that makes you so certain that a talking snake was a miracle? Is it asking too much if you answer a teensy little question?Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.

It is not asking too much. But it does seem a little redundant. Didn't I discuss for you my reasons for accepting this matter as a historical miracle?I spoke of the miracles often coming in the Bible in pairs. And in the case of the miracle of a speaking animal you seemed a little opened to that possibility with Balaam's donkey in Numbers.And I spoke of Christ's apparent taking of the account seriously, as history. I spoke of Paul's taking of the account as serious. I spoke of the other historical artifacts as also having allegorical significance.I don't know what more you need to know about my reasons for accepting it, unusual as it may be, as some miracle. We all know that today animals don't speak. So what else could it have been?The flow of history from early Genesis seems seamless. Perhaps you could show me what passage clearly indicates a line drawn in which on one side is the mythical and on the other is the historical. Where exactly would you draw the line saying that the reader descends from this timeless mythic realm into the practical everyday?Genesis says after this event God drove the man out of Eden. Latter we read that Cain moved to the East of Eden. How do you move to the east of a mythical and non-existent place? What alternative explanation do you give for Adam leaving the place the garden in Eden?What is your snakeless and miracleless version of Adam and his early descendents and where do you derive it from? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The poster protests about something talking which should not. In this case the serpent in Genesis.We have a prophecy that in the end times something else will speak which should not. That is an idol of the Antichrist. In speaking of a terrible false prophet and an Antichrist Scripture says: I cannot underestimate to what extent the enemy of God will go to deceive man. The end time represents a time of his highest desperation. Probably the initial creation of man also marked a time of Satanic desperation. Both seemed marked with extraordinary agents of deception - a speaking serpent and an image which can speak.I have not yet figured out how the Egyptian magicians were able to imitate the miracle of God in turning the rod of Aaron into a serpent. But the Bible says that they did the same thing through their occult arts. Something evil and extraordinary was going on there.Perhaps the image in the end that John speaks of is some bit of advanced technology. I do not know. Perhaps the speaking serpent was just a serpent utilized in some vantriloquistic manner by a demonic spirit. I don't know. And I do not let curiosity distract me ad infinitum, from the weighty matter of God's words uttered to the first man.We're experts at missing the point when it comes to the Bible.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

'It is not asking too much.'If the snake taking was a miracle, whose miracle was it? God's? Or the other guy's?

I would just say that it was an act of Satan. That is a display of his power.

So Eve, having witnessed Satan's amazing power, presumably supposed that Satan was at least as strong as, if not stronger than God. What reason was there for failing to believe the snake? Was she thrown out of Eden for believing in a miracle? Jesus condemned people for not believing them, did he not?

I think you are assuming a lot.Let's consider your last statement - "Jesus condemend people for not believing them, did he not?"Jesus did not always entrust Himself to people who were impressed with signs and wonders."Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed into His name when they saw the signs which He did. BUT Jesus did not entrust Himself to them, for He knew all men, And because He did not need anyone to testify concerning man, for He Himself knew what was in man." (John 2:24,25 my emphasis)Here, though a crowd was impressed by some miraculous thing Jesus did, He seemed not pleased to entrust Himself to these people. Apparently He knew them deeper and found their motives not calibrated to the will of God.I think then that it is something deeper in the heart of man which God looks for. It may not simply be one's being convenced that a miracle has taken place.In another place I read:"Jesus therefore said to him, Unless you see signs and wonders, you will by no means believe." (John 4:48)This expresses Jesus' disappointment that some people would only believe in Him if there was a miracle performed. Perhaps they paid no attention to His words and only were sensationalized by His works of power. He seems not too happy here either.In another place the Pharisees demanded a sign of Him and He refused:"And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, testing Him asked Him to show them a sign out of heaven. ... An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and a sign shall not be given to it, except the sign of Jonah. And He left them and went away." (See Matt. 16:1-4)Jesus did not always jump at the challenge to prove that miracles could issue from Him. Here He impless only His death and resurrection will be given to this "evil" miracle seeking generation.So I think there is something deeper in the heart and in the repentance of man that God seeks. It is not just being wowed with miracles that can accomplish what He wants in man's heart.As to the first part of your post, I do not know what Eve reacted the way she did. The Bible is economical. There may be other things related to the event which we are not told.But the main thing is that the serpent contradicted what God had said. God was their Creator. They should have stayed under the covering and protection of God's authority.Trusting another voice, even if it be accompanied with a miracle, is dangerous. Allow me to refer again to the end times and prophecy.Revelation says that a false prophet will arise accompanying the Antichrist. Great signs and wonders will be performed by them. Of the false prophet Revelation aptly states:"And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke like a dragon. And he excercises all the authority of the first beast in his sight, and he causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose death stroke was healed." (Rev. 13:11,12)"[H]e had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke like a dragon".This false prophet will have some appearance to seem to be like Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. But those with discernment can detect that in his talk is the nature of Satan, the dragon.So these days we need more than to just be impressed with miraculous powers. We need to have the spiritual discernment to detect whose mind and will is being expressed in the words. Those who cannot detect the speaking of Satan but only are impressed with the signs performed by this false prophet, will be deceived.Paul says also that it is the love of the truth which will innoculate us against Satanic deception. And those who do not love the truth will one day be led astray by a miracle worker. This will be soveriegnly allowed by God to the stubborn:" And then the lawless one will be revealed (whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of His coming),

​

the coming of whom is according to Satan's operation in all power and signs and wonders of a lie.

​

And in all deceit of unrighteousness among those who are perishing, because they did not receive the love of the truth that they might be saved. " (2 Thess. 2:7-10) At the initiations of human history as well as at the conclusion of the church age, man is called to love the truth of God in which is righteousness. The miracles of any powerful creature like Satan, are best turned away from if they are delivered with a lie to contradict the words of God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Copy and paste, poster. It's faster, and more reliable.'Jesus did not always entrust Himself to people who were impressed with signs and wonders.'That's no reason to [i]banish[i] poor Eve, though, who, in your unique version of events, witnessed a miracle and believed, as later commended and commanded by Jesus. She had no reason to suppose that the person you call Satan was not actually God, and good reason to suppose that he was God.It seems to me that a lot of religious people make that mistake.