Green Berets in Negligees

Gerald

Resident Fiend
What about a man's freedom not to be leered at?
Newsflash: there is no such thing as freedom not to be leered at, just like there's no such thing as freedom not to be frowned at, snarled at, sneered at, growled at, whistled at or cussed at.

Looks like somebody needs to "man" up and grow a thicker skin...
 

Persephone66

BANNED
Banned
Newsflash: there is no such thing as freedom not to be leered at, just like there's no such thing as freedom not to be frowned at, snarled at, sneered at, growled at, whistled at or cussed at.

Looks like somebody needs to "man" up and grow a thicker skin...

He's probly afraid that there might be homosexuals that are more of a man than he is.
 

PlastikBuddha

New member
There could be more leering if the homosexuals could be open with their sexuality instead of having to hide it.

It's possible, but is there any realistic reason to think so? I'm sure the exact same line of reasoning was used to exclude women from service, but our soldiers are professional enough to handle that.
 

lightbringer

TOL Subscriber
Will Green Berets in negligees (Enyart) hurt the morale of our troops?
"Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced new regulations yesterday on enforcing the law, stating that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military. The regulations limit the evidence that will be allowed and requires busy high-ranking officers to handle discharge procedures. The Pentagon's legal counsel stressed that this does not change or place a moratorium on the law.

Busy high ranking officer's are busy due to the fact that there has always been high ranking officers reviewing and administering to discharge review boards.

Concerned Women for America CEO Penny Nance said, "This will create more confusion and fear among military members. Members of the military already fear punishment for agreeing with the federal law that homosexuals in the military 'would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion.' 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' muddled the law by barring asking the key question of those joining the military as to whether or not they are homosexual..." Full Story. New Regs on 'Gays' in Military Will Undercut Morale

I wonder how many years Penny served in the military to develop this knowledge?

Unit cohesion, discipline, good order and standards of morale are developed first by all men being treated equally and fairly.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
[Man's freedom not to be leered at] "Disgusting as it may be, where is that in the Bill of Rights?"

This is why it should be re-criminalized (Lev. 20:13). When men feel free to act depraved, we all lose. I am speaking of the way it should be (and will be [Mk 13:26], thank God) not the way it is.

Rights come from God not man.
 
Last edited:

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
"What makes you think that just because someone is gay they can't control their attractions..."
Being the make-believer that you are, you do not appreciate what John MacArthur calls the exceeding sinfulness of sin (Jas 1:15).

"What the world calls diverse, God calls perverse (Rogers)."


"...[T]hey just aren't being honest about who they are."
They are being very dishonest about who they are. We know how the truth of the Bible disturbs you:

"Did ye not read, that He who made them, from the beginning a male and a female made them (Mt 19:4)."

Pray tell, when do you start believing the Bible? Ge 1:27. :rolleyes:

Still wishing the foundations of Genesis to go away? Jude 18.

[Please tell us when you have ever stood for God and his values?] "Every day..."
:rotfl: You are a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist. Why should anyone listen to you or your agenda? Jn 8:44. :idunno:

"It is not forbidden in America, nor is it classified as an "abomination.""
This nation was founded in Judeo-Christian values [1 Kin. 14:24]--thank God, healthier than your wicked heart [Jer 17:9]). If we'd like to keep a healthy fighting force, we will keep it that way (Rom. 1:24, 26, 27). We don't need dandy men (Judges 7:5).
"The future is assured. It's just the past that keeps changing." ~ Russian joke :Commie:
Samuel Adams: “The religion and public liberty of a people are intimately connected; their interest are interwoven, they cannot subsist separately; and therefore they rise and fall together.”

James Madison: “It is impossible for the man of pious reflection not to perceive in it a finger of that Almighty hand which has been so frequently and signally extended to our relief in the critical stages of the revolution.”

Alexander Hamilton: “For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system, which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interest.”

Benjamin Franklin: “All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity.”

Charles Pinckney: “When the great work was done and published, I was struck with amazement. Nothing less than the superintending Hand of Providence, that so miraculously carried us through the war … could have brought it about so complete, upon the whole.”

George Washington: “No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the affairs of men, more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.”

Full Samuel Adams quote: "Is it not high time for the people of this country explicitly to declare, whether they will be freemen or slaves? It is an important question which ought to be decided. It concerns us more than anything in this life. The salvation of our souls is interested in the event. For wherever tyranny is establish’d, immorality of every kind comes in like a torrent. It is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice. For they cannot live in any country where virtue and knowledge prevail. The religion and public liberty of a people are intimately connected; their interest are interwoven, they cannot subsist separately; and therefore they rise and fall together. For this reason, it is always observable, that those who are combined to destroy the people’s liberties, practice every art to poison their morals. How greatly then does it concern us, at all events, to put a stop to the progress of tyranny.”

George Washington: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labour to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens."

"[Washington] said anyone who tries to remove religion and morality from public life, I don't even let them call themselves a patriot because they are trying to destroy the country...

...We are responsible to our posterity…We are the stewards of the country and we have to remember that we have a responsibility to preserve the foundations and they are religion and morality (Historian David Barton)."

Barton is the Founder and President of Wallbuilders, a national pro-family organization that presents America's forgotten history and heroes.

John Jay: "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." John Jay, one of the framers of the Constitution, was appointed by George Washington in 1789 to be the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (and later served two terms as governor of New York). He wrote, in a private letter (1797) to clergyman Jedidiah Morse).

See:

Freedom Ribbon
 
Last edited:

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Serpent:duh:
Ad hominem. :yawn:

[Jude 18. Sin of homosexuality] "That has nothing to do with my post..."
I am not stupid enough to believe that you will gain anything. Liberals rarely do. I post for the reader in general who may change his/her mind and reject your lies.

But FYI, the Jude 18 bit was for you. You are a mocker of Christians. The Bible warned about people like you. :idunno: You're just a stench that we must tolerate until our Savior comes (Isa 34:3). :granite:
 
Last edited:

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Is the part about the talking snake truth?

Genesis 3:1

"Among the beasts of the field that had been examined and named by Adam was one whose coloration was bright and beautiful and whose movements were smooth and graceful, a most attractive animal. Furthermore, this animal, the serpent, was more clever than any of the other animals. In her innocence, the woman was dazzled and soon led astray by this subtly attractive and deceptive creature.
Before considering the difficult question associated with the capacity of the serpent to speak in human language and his remarkable ability to deceive Eve, we must first examine the nature of the evil spirit using the serpent’s body. It is obvious that there is more to this event than a mere fable of a talking snake. The Bible later identifies that “old serpent” as none other than the devil himself (Revelation 12:9; 20:2), who has led an agelong angelic rebellion against God and His plans for mankind.
As noted earlier, a great host of angels (meaning “messengers”) had been created (probably on the first day of creation) for a variety of ministries around God’s throne. They had various ranks and positions of authority: “principalities and powers.” Evidently the greatest of these created spirit-beings was one called Lucifer (“day-star”).
Lucifer is spoken of in Isaiah 14:12–15. This passage is in the context of a prophetic warning to the wicked “king of Babylon,” but the prophet seems to go beyond his denunciation of this earthly monarch to the malevolent spirit who had possessed and utilized the king’s body and powers. The statements made in this passage could never be true of a mere earthly king. This same powerful spirit is similarly addressed in Ezekiel 28:11–19, a passage first directed at another later earthly potentate, similarly possessed, the king of Tyre. In the latter passage, he is addressed as “the anointed cherub that covereth” the very throne of God, the highest being in all of God’s creation.
God had told this high angel that he had been “created” (Ezekiel 28:13, 15), and no doubt informed him that he and all the other mighty angels were to be “ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation” (Hebrews 1:14). He was perfect in his ways (Ezekiel 28:15), just as was everything else God had created (Genesis 1:31); and he continued thus for some time after man’s creation. Lucifer did not sin until later since, as the Scripture says, everything in God’s completed creation, even “the heavens and the earth … and all the host of them” (Genesis 2:1), were very good. The “host of heaven,” as we have noted previously, included the angels as well as the stars.
Soon after this, however, Lucifer’s “heart was lifted up” because of his beauty and he corrupted his wisdom by reason of his brightness (Ezekiel 28:17). Though God had assured him that He had created him, he somehow began to doubt God’s word and deceived himself into thinking he himself could become God. “… I will be like the Most High,” he said in his heart (Isaiah 14:14), evidently thinking that he and God were similar beings and that, therefore, he might lead a successful rebellion and overthrow Him. Perhaps, he may have reasoned, neither he nor God was really “created,” but all of the angels, as well as God Himself, had just arisen by some natural process from the primeval chaos. All had somehow developed (or “evolved”) out of prior materials and it was only an accident of priority of time that placed him, with all his wisdom and beauty, beneath God in the angelic hierarchy.
Lest anyone should express surprise or doubt that Satan might ever conceive such an absurd notion, he should remember that exactly the same absurdity (namely, that this complex universe has arisen by natural processes from the primeval chaos, that the universe is a self-existing, self-sustaining, self-developing entity, and that man is “god”) is believed and taught as solemn fact by most of the world’s intellectual leaders even today! Satan is evidently the “deceiver of the whole world” (Revelation 12:9) and has apparently deceived himself most of all, believing in all seriousness that he can exalt his own “throne above the stars of God” (Isaiah 14:13). Many other angels, possibly a third of them, followed him in his rebellion (Revelation 12:4, 9).
Because “iniquity was found in him” (Ezekiel 28:15), Satan fell “as lightning falls from heaven” (Luke 10:18). God “cast him to the ground” (Ezekiel 28:17) and ultimately he will be “brought down to hell” (Isaiah 14:15; Matthew 25:41).
It may well be possible also that one of the factors that generated Satan’s resentment against God was God’s plan for mankind. People were to be uniquely “in the image and likeness of God,” and also were to be able to reproduce their own kind, neither of which blessings was shared by Lucifer or the angels. This may be the reason why God cast Satan to the earth, instead of sending him immediately to the lake of fire, to enable him to tempt man to fall as he himself had fallen.
Perhaps he believed that, by capturing man’s dominion and affection, along with the allegiance of his own angels, he might even yet be able to ascend back to heaven and dethrone God. Thus Lucifer, the “day-star,” became Satan, the “adversary,” or “accuser,” opposing and calumniating God and all His purposes. And now he became “that old serpent,” entering into the body of this “most clever” of all the “beasts of the field” in order to approach Eve with his evil solicitations.
Demonic spirits evidently have the ability, under certain conditions, to indwell or “possess” either human bodies or animal bodies (Luke 8:33); and Satan on this occasion chose the serpent as the one most suitable for his purposes. There has been much speculation as to whether the serpent originally was able to stand upright (the Hebrew word, nachash, some maintain, originally meant “shining, upright creature”). This idea is possibly supported by the later curse (Genesis 3:14), dooming the serpent to crawl on its belly “eating” dust, and perhaps also by those structures in the snake’s skeleton which have been interpreted by evolutionists as “vestigial” limbs.
There is also the unsolved question as to whether some of the Edenic animals, especially the serpent, may have originally had the ability to converse with man in some way. There is now, of course, a great gulf between the barks and grunts of animals and the intelligent, abstract, symbolic speech of man. On one occasion, God did, as it were, “open” the vocal organs of an animal, when He allowed Balaam’s *** to speak (Numbers 22:28). Some modern zoologists are now claiming the ability to teach chimpanzees a rudimentary form of speech.
On the other hand, it may simply be that Eve, in her innocence, did not yet know that the animals around her in Eden were incapable of speaking and so was not alarmed when the serpent spoke to her. One’s interpretation of this occurrence, in the complete absence of any further Scriptural explanation or amplification, may depend on the degree of his subconscious commitment to uniformitarianism.
Apart from uniformitarian considerations, there may really be no reason why we should not assume that, in the original creation, the serpent was a beautiful, upright animal with the ability to speak and converse with human beings. Such an interpretation would at least make the verses in this passage easier to understand, even though it may make them harder to believe. The fact that great physiological changes took place in both the plant and animal kingdoms at the time of the curse, as well as in man himself, is obvious from Genesis 3:14–19, and it is obvious also that changes of such degree are quite within the capabilities of God to produce.
In cases of doubtful meanings of Scripture, one must not be dogmatic; but, at the same time, he should not forget the cardinal rule of interpretation; the Bible was written to be understood, by commoner as well as scholar. Therefore it should normally be taken literally unless the context both indicates a nonliteral meaning and also makes it clear what the true meaning is intended to be.
It is at least possible (as well as the most natural reading) that the higher animals could originally communicate directly with man, who was their master. These were possibly the same as the animals to whom Adam gave names, and over whom man was to exercise friendly dominion.
It is further possible that all these animals (other than the birds) were quadrupeds, except the serpent, who had the remarkable ability, with a strong vertebral skeleton supported by small limbs, to rear and hold himself erect when talking with Adam or Eve. After the temptation and fall, God altered the vocal equipment of the animals, including the structure of the speech centers in their brains. He did this in order to place a still greater barrier between men and animals and to prevent further use of their bodies by demonic spirits to deceive men again in this fashion. The body of the serpent, in addition, was altered even further by eliminating his ability to stand erect, eye-to-eye with man as it were.
Again it should be emphasized that the above interpretation is not intended dogmatically. The Bible is not explicit on these matters and such explanations no doubt are hard to accept by the “modern mind.” Nevertheless, they are not impossible or unreasonable in the context of the original creation and, indeed, appear to follow directly from the most natural and literal reading of the passage.
In any case, the approach of Satan (through the serpent) to the woman was a masterpiece of effective subtlety. Catching her when she was alone, without Adam to counsel and warn her, probably one day when she was admiring the beautiful fruit trees in the garden, he first insinuated something which neither she nor Adam had even imagined before, namely, that it was possible for a creature to question God’s Word, “Yea, hath God said?” In other words, “Did God really say such a thing as that!” Note the slightly mocking superior condescension to Eve’s “naive” acceptance of God’s command, a technique followed by Satan and his human emissaries with great success ever since.
This first suggestion that God could be questioned was accompanied by an inference that God was not quite as good and loving as they had thought. “He has not allowed you to eat the fruit of every tree, has He? Why do you suppose He is withholding something from you like that?”
If one studies each situation closely enough, he will find that sin always begins by questioning either the Word of God or the goodness of God, or both. This is the age-old lie of Satan, the lie with which he deceived himself in the first place, and which succeeded so well with our first parents that he has used it ever since."
Morris, H. M. (1976). The Genesis record : A scientific and devotional commentary on the book of beginnings. Includes indexes. (106). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Gay men and women have served in our military for years. So now they'll be open about it. Big deal.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
The military and the people in it are concerned soldiers doing their job, not who they are having sex with.

Just like normal people, they don't care if someone is gay.
The issue is the fact that they aren't normal; they're queer. Abnormal. Aberrant. Out-of-line. Off-kilter. Whack. Looney. Screwed up in the head. Sick. Twisted. Freaks. :flamer:
 

PlastikBuddha

New member
Being the make-believer that you are, you do not appreciate what John MacArthur calls the exceeding sinfulness of sin (Jas 1:15).
You are a liar and a hypocrite. If you think calling ME a make-believer after displaying no integrity, no respect for truth, and love for your fellow man you calling me a make-believer has any weight whatsoever you are as deluded as you are ignorant.
It is not the army's job to control sin, or to keep our soldiers holy.
:mrt::duh:
"What the world calls diverse, God calls perverse (Rogers)."
More bumper-stickers in place of actual argument.
They are being very dishonest about who they are. We know how the truth of the Bible disturbs you:

"Did ye not read, that He who made them, from the beginning a male and a female made them (Mt 19:4)."
Now show mer where that is written in the US Military code.
:mrt::duh:
Pray tell, when do you start believing the Bible? Ge 1:27. :rolleyes:
When I became a Christian. When will you start?
Still wishing the foundations of Genesis to go away? Jude 18.
Wondering why you think it should be applied as law to people regardless of their own faith.
:rotfl: You are a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist. Why should anyone listen to you or your agenda? Jn 8:44. :idunno:
You are a liar. Why should anyone listen to your falsehoods? You've been called on that again and again. Each time you back off and then you bring out the exact same lies again and again. You never learn.
This nation was founded in Judeo-Christian values [1 Kin. 14:24]--
As well as Greco-Roman and Euoropean rationalist values.
:mrt::duh:
This is why you fail- you don't know the truth. You don't care about the truth. You don't stand for the truth. You stand for convenient lies that make you feel good about yourself and your choices.
 

PlastikBuddha

New member
Ad hominem. :yawn:
Nope. But keep trying. The law of averages says that eventually you will probably correctly identify an actual case of ad hominem, even if only by accident. Ad hom does not mean making fun of someone's name.
:mrt::duh:
I am not stupid enough to believe that you will gain anything.
I beg to differ.
Liberals rarely do. I post for the reader in general who may change his/her mind and reject your lies.
You don't know truth or lies. You post to make yourself feel smart. It would probably work better if you understood what you were posting.
But FYI, the Jude 18 bit was for you. You are a mocker of Christians.
Hardly. I'm a mocker of idiots. Some idiots are Christians.
The Bible warned about people like you. :idunno: You're just a stench that we must tolerate until our Savior comes (Isa 34:3). :granite:
You wouldn't know your Saviour if He appeared in front of you waving His scars in your face. You would probably call Him a liberal and cheer as he carried his cross past you on the way to Golgotha. Christians care about truth, you care about sound bites and cut-and-paste arguments that you don't even understand. Christians care about each other- you are more interested in strict orthodoxy and would turn away anyone who doesn't toe your party line.
You are a false Christian, serpent:duh:.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
"I'm a mocker of idiots."
Jesus affirmed the scriptures (Jn 5:47). He believed in young, earth creation (Ex 20:11; 31:17). He must be an idiot too--which is really what you are saying. :rolleyes: Your horns are showing (Jn 8:44). :devil:

"Christians care about truth, you care about sound bites and cut-and-paste arguments..."
And when your truth collides with biblical truth, who wins? The PB god? :bow:

"You are a false Christian, serpent:duh:"
The only true Christians are pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanists like like you? :rotfl:
 

PlastikBuddha

New member
Jesus affirmed the scriptures (Jn 5:47). He believed in young, earth creation (Ex 20:11; 31:17). He must be an idiot too--which is really what you are saying. :rolleyes: Your horns are showing (Jn 8:44). :devil:
You speak awfully glibly of your own interpretation of scripture as though it were the only on possibly, serpent:duh:.
Christ didn't come to teach basic science, He came to save men's souls. He didn't come to preach on the origin of species, but on the eternal consequences of our choices in life.
Your stupid is showing.
You keep saying, when backed into a corner, that YEC is not a salvation issue. Then every time things don't go your way you bring it up again like a petulant child. Do you think it impresses anyone?
:idunno:
And when your truth collides with biblical truth, who wins? The PB god? :bow:
And when does "my" truth collide with biblical truth? YEC isn't biblical truth- or any other kind of truth for that matter. It is a flawed interpretation of scripture and a bastardization of science.
The only true Christians are pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanists like like you? :rotfl:
How many times will you trot out the same lies again and again? What makes a person a Christian, serpent:duh:? Is it their politics? Is it their science? Is it how they feel about gays?
The reason I say you are a false Christian is because you put the emphasis on everything but Christ. You look to every triviality that pops into your head but steadfastly avoid what actually matters.
Sad, isn't it?
 

Persephone66

BANNED
Banned
Genesis 3:1

"Among the beasts of the field that had been examined and named by Adam was one whose coloration was bright and beautiful and whose movements were smooth and graceful, a most attractive animal. Furthermore, this animal, the serpent, was more clever than any of the other animals. In her innocence, the woman was dazzled and soon led astray by this subtly attractive and deceptive creature.
Before considering the difficult question associated with the capacity of the serpent to speak in human language and his remarkable ability to deceive Eve, we must first examine the nature of the evil spirit using the serpent’s body. It is obvious that there is more to this event than a mere fable of a talking snake. The Bible later identifies that “old serpent” as none other than the devil himself (Revelation 12:9; 20:2), who has led an agelong angelic rebellion against God and His plans for mankind.
As noted earlier, a great host of angels (meaning “messengers”) had been created (probably on the first day of creation) for a variety of ministries around God’s throne. They had various ranks and positions of authority: “principalities and powers.” Evidently the greatest of these created spirit-beings was one called Lucifer (“day-star”).
Lucifer is spoken of in Isaiah 14:12–15. This passage is in the context of a prophetic warning to the wicked “king of Babylon,” but the prophet seems to go beyond his denunciation of this earthly monarch to the malevolent spirit who had possessed and utilized the king’s body and powers. The statements made in this passage could never be true of a mere earthly king. This same powerful spirit is similarly addressed in Ezekiel 28:11–19, a passage first directed at another later earthly potentate, similarly possessed, the king of Tyre. In the latter passage, he is addressed as “the anointed cherub that covereth” the very throne of God, the highest being in all of God’s creation.
God had told this high angel that he had been “created” (Ezekiel 28:13, 15), and no doubt informed him that he and all the other mighty angels were to be “ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation” (Hebrews 1:14). He was perfect in his ways (Ezekiel 28:15), just as was everything else God had created (Genesis 1:31); and he continued thus for some time after man’s creation. Lucifer did not sin until later since, as the Scripture says, everything in God’s completed creation, even “the heavens and the earth … and all the host of them” (Genesis 2:1), were very good. The “host of heaven,” as we have noted previously, included the angels as well as the stars.
Soon after this, however, Lucifer’s “heart was lifted up” because of his beauty and he corrupted his wisdom by reason of his brightness (Ezekiel 28:17). Though God had assured him that He had created him, he somehow began to doubt God’s word and deceived himself into thinking he himself could become God. “… I will be like the Most High,” he said in his heart (Isaiah 14:14), evidently thinking that he and God were similar beings and that, therefore, he might lead a successful rebellion and overthrow Him. Perhaps, he may have reasoned, neither he nor God was really “created,” but all of the angels, as well as God Himself, had just arisen by some natural process from the primeval chaos. All had somehow developed (or “evolved”) out of prior materials and it was only an accident of priority of time that placed him, with all his wisdom and beauty, beneath God in the angelic hierarchy.
Lest anyone should express surprise or doubt that Satan might ever conceive such an absurd notion, he should remember that exactly the same absurdity (namely, that this complex universe has arisen by natural processes from the primeval chaos, that the universe is a self-existing, self-sustaining, self-developing entity, and that man is “god”) is believed and taught as solemn fact by most of the world’s intellectual leaders even today! Satan is evidently the “deceiver of the whole world” (Revelation 12:9) and has apparently deceived himself most of all, believing in all seriousness that he can exalt his own “throne above the stars of God” (Isaiah 14:13). Many other angels, possibly a third of them, followed him in his rebellion (Revelation 12:4, 9).
Because “iniquity was found in him” (Ezekiel 28:15), Satan fell “as lightning falls from heaven” (Luke 10:18). God “cast him to the ground” (Ezekiel 28:17) and ultimately he will be “brought down to hell” (Isaiah 14:15; Matthew 25:41).
It may well be possible also that one of the factors that generated Satan’s resentment against God was God’s plan for mankind. People were to be uniquely “in the image and likeness of God,” and also were to be able to reproduce their own kind, neither of which blessings was shared by Lucifer or the angels. This may be the reason why God cast Satan to the earth, instead of sending him immediately to the lake of fire, to enable him to tempt man to fall as he himself had fallen.
Perhaps he believed that, by capturing man’s dominion and affection, along with the allegiance of his own angels, he might even yet be able to ascend back to heaven and dethrone God. Thus Lucifer, the “day-star,” became Satan, the “adversary,” or “accuser,” opposing and calumniating God and all His purposes. And now he became “that old serpent,” entering into the body of this “most clever” of all the “beasts of the field” in order to approach Eve with his evil solicitations.
Demonic spirits evidently have the ability, under certain conditions, to indwell or “possess” either human bodies or animal bodies (Luke 8:33); and Satan on this occasion chose the serpent as the one most suitable for his purposes. There has been much speculation as to whether the serpent originally was able to stand upright (the Hebrew word, nachash, some maintain, originally meant “shining, upright creature”). This idea is possibly supported by the later curse (Genesis 3:14), dooming the serpent to crawl on its belly “eating” dust, and perhaps also by those structures in the snake’s skeleton which have been interpreted by evolutionists as “vestigial” limbs.
There is also the unsolved question as to whether some of the Edenic animals, especially the serpent, may have originally had the ability to converse with man in some way. There is now, of course, a great gulf between the barks and grunts of animals and the intelligent, abstract, symbolic speech of man. On one occasion, God did, as it were, “open” the vocal organs of an animal, when He allowed Balaam’s *** to speak (Numbers 22:28). Some modern zoologists are now claiming the ability to teach chimpanzees a rudimentary form of speech.
On the other hand, it may simply be that Eve, in her innocence, did not yet know that the animals around her in Eden were incapable of speaking and so was not alarmed when the serpent spoke to her. One’s interpretation of this occurrence, in the complete absence of any further Scriptural explanation or amplification, may depend on the degree of his subconscious commitment to uniformitarianism.
Apart from uniformitarian considerations, there may really be no reason why we should not assume that, in the original creation, the serpent was a beautiful, upright animal with the ability to speak and converse with human beings. Such an interpretation would at least make the verses in this passage easier to understand, even though it may make them harder to believe. The fact that great physiological changes took place in both the plant and animal kingdoms at the time of the curse, as well as in man himself, is obvious from Genesis 3:14–19, and it is obvious also that changes of such degree are quite within the capabilities of God to produce.
In cases of doubtful meanings of Scripture, one must not be dogmatic; but, at the same time, he should not forget the cardinal rule of interpretation; the Bible was written to be understood, by commoner as well as scholar. Therefore it should normally be taken literally unless the context both indicates a nonliteral meaning and also makes it clear what the true meaning is intended to be.
It is at least possible (as well as the most natural reading) that the higher animals could originally communicate directly with man, who was their master. These were possibly the same as the animals to whom Adam gave names, and over whom man was to exercise friendly dominion.
It is further possible that all these animals (other than the birds) were quadrupeds, except the serpent, who had the remarkable ability, with a strong vertebral skeleton supported by small limbs, to rear and hold himself erect when talking with Adam or Eve. After the temptation and fall, God altered the vocal equipment of the animals, including the structure of the speech centers in their brains. He did this in order to place a still greater barrier between men and animals and to prevent further use of their bodies by demonic spirits to deceive men again in this fashion. The body of the serpent, in addition, was altered even further by eliminating his ability to stand erect, eye-to-eye with man as it were.
Again it should be emphasized that the above interpretation is not intended dogmatically. The Bible is not explicit on these matters and such explanations no doubt are hard to accept by the “modern mind.” Nevertheless, they are not impossible or unreasonable in the context of the original creation and, indeed, appear to follow directly from the most natural and literal reading of the passage.
In any case, the approach of Satan (through the serpent) to the woman was a masterpiece of effective subtlety. Catching her when she was alone, without Adam to counsel and warn her, probably one day when she was admiring the beautiful fruit trees in the garden, he first insinuated something which neither she nor Adam had even imagined before, namely, that it was possible for a creature to question God’s Word, “Yea, hath God said?” In other words, “Did God really say such a thing as that!” Note the slightly mocking superior condescension to Eve’s “naive” acceptance of God’s command, a technique followed by Satan and his human emissaries with great success ever since.
This first suggestion that God could be questioned was accompanied by an inference that God was not quite as good and loving as they had thought. “He has not allowed you to eat the fruit of every tree, has He? Why do you suppose He is withholding something from you like that?”
If one studies each situation closely enough, he will find that sin always begins by questioning either the Word of God or the goodness of God, or both. This is the age-old lie of Satan, the lie with which he deceived himself in the first place, and which succeeded so well with our first parents that he has used it ever since."
Morris, H. M. (1976). The Genesis record : A scientific and devotional commentary on the book of beginnings. Includes indexes. (106). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

tl;dr
So is that just a really long way of saying you believe in talking snakes? A yes or no will do just fine.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
"You are a liar and a hypocrite."
Ad hominem (and favorite term for the leftist). It only took .2 seconds this time. :jump:

See:

Tactics of the Left

You are the pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist claiming to be a Christian and I am the hypocrite? :rotfl:



"It is not the army's job to control sin, or to keep our soldiers holy."
You wouldn't know the first thing about creating a strong military (Judges 7:5). I'd put my American forces against your fruit loops any day. :flamer:

Ultimately, goodness has defeated evil (Jn 16:33). You should get on the winning side. Jesus loves the unlovable. :mmph:

Jesus loves you (Jn 3:16). Jesus is willing to save you (2 Pe 3:9). Repent (Eze 18:30-32; Ac 17:30). Believe (Mk 9:23).


[Still wishing the foundations of Genesis to go away? Jude 18.] "Wondering why you think it should be applied as law to people regardless of their own faith."
You are under the law (Mt 5:18, Ga 3:24). Get yourself a savior.

"You are a liar. Why should anyone listen to your falsehoods?"
:blabla: Unfortunately, you have zero credibility. You are a child-killer, pervert, idolater (Prov 23:7). :rotfl:

Why should anyone listen to you if they are interested in the things of God? De 26:15; Ps 20:6; Isa 57:15. Heaven is a holy place. You're going to have to remove your dirty diapers to get there (Isa 61:10). :baby:

"[Y]ou bring out the exact same lies again and again."
I lie about life being sacred? Ge 1:26; Jas 3:9. I lie about the wickedness of homosexuality? 1 Kin. 14:24. I lie that God made mankind male and female? Mt 19:4. I lie about young earth creation? Ex 20:11; 31:17.

"You never learn."
Like a typical leftist, you've got it backward again (2 Ti 3:7). :hammer: The scriptures are the source of truth (Jas 1:18). Why should anyone discard the foundations of scripture in favor of the morality coming from your wicked heart? Jer 17:9, Eccl 10:2, Mt 6:33.
 
Top