WHO HAS DOMINION, MAN OR ANIMAL?

Concerning the familiar story of the Fall of mankind, our pastor recently noted offhand that it was a case of reversal. Whereas God originally gave dominion over the animals of the earth to Adam and Eve, in fact the snake, a created animal, co-opted that position of power so that they listened to his advice to their detriment and the detriment of all their descendants.

I confess that I had never viewed that narrative before from that particular perspective. But it is echoed in the scholarly literature on the subject. For example, Wenham states that in Genesis 2:5-3:24, “the serpent represents the animals.” Below are some additional related nuances gleaned from various commentators' words on those places in the first three chapters of the Bible in which man's position in relation to the animals is mentioned. As you will note, there are several major points in these passages on which scholarly opinion remains divided. And it all begins with the proper explanation of biblical nomenclature regarding the animal world.

Genesis 1:24-25

Hamilton: “Three categories of land creatures are described in these two verses. By cattle is meant primarily large quadrupeds which are domesticated. Reptiles (lit., 'creeping [or crawling] things') designate the legless creatures such as lizards and snakes. The third category, every kind of wild animal, is simply the Hebrew word for 'living things.'”

However, Wenham defines these three categories in a slightly different manner when he says, “The Hebrew terminology is more fluid than this translation suggests...Here the animal world is being classified into three main groups, a favorite device of Hebrew writers and legislators: domestic, wild, and small animals. The last named 'creeping things' refers to mice, reptiles, insects, and any other little creatures that keep close to the ground.”

Genesis 1:26. 28

“The new element in the creation of man was that he was to be 'in the image and after the likeness of God', which would show itself above all in his dominion over the animal creation.” (Ellison)

This doctrinal fact is found elsewhere in the Bible, for as Schaeffer says, “Perhaps one of the most striking expressions of the concept of man's dominion is found in Psalm 8:5-8 which includes the words 'Thou hast made him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet...” This passage may even contain a subtle reminder of the later punishment of the snake in Genesis 3:15 (“He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel”).

Genesis 2:19

“Yahweh parades before Adam members of the animal world so that the man may convey on each its name. This is the first fulfillment of God's directive in 1:26,28 to exercise authority over the animal, the fish, and the fowl. For to convey a name (qara'le) is to speak from a position of authority and sovereignty.” (Hamilton)

Similarly, Ellison explains: “In the ancient world to give a person a name was a sign of authority over him (cf. 2 Kg. 23:34; 24:17). In the man's naming of the animals was the first recorded act of dominion over them.”

Bob Dylan has written a wonderful song about Adam naming all the animals which ends just as he is beginning to give the serpent a name.

Genesis 3:1

“The original readers likely would have immediately recognized the serpent as a representation of evil since walking serpents were well-known symbols of evil in the ancient Near East...rather than simply ignore the serpent and shove him out of the garden, Eve dignifies him with an answer and thus opens herself up to persuasion...God turns the walking serpent into a slithering one and declares that there will be perpetual war between him and his offspring and the woman and hers. The New Testament sees the fulfillment of his punishment in the struggle between those who follow evil and those who follow God. God also informs the serpent that he will ultimately be vanquished, and the New Testament understands this victory to take place when Christ defeats the serpent on the cross (Gen. 3:15; Rom. 16:20; Rev. 12:9).” (Longman III)

Kline says, “The camouflaged, sinuous movement of the movement of the serpent made it symbolically suitable as a medium for the wiles of the devil. By engaging in apologetic discourse with a challenging serpent, the woman accepted Satan's violation of the law of God's kingdom whereby all things visible had been placed under man's rule. She thereby yielded to the usurped authority of Satan.” (3:2-3)

Luc: “In its first occurrence in Gen 3:1, the author, in describing the serpent as 'arum, crafty, lays an important background for the understanding of cleverness. Its phonological resemblance to 'arumin, naked (Gen 2:25) probably served to form a link between the Fall narrative and the Creation narrative...The innocence of Adam and Eve is broken by the 'craftiness' of the tempter, but the latter's success is under God's curse. The 'arum serpent is now 'arur, cursed (Gen 3:14). God's judgment on cleverness that directs people away from his word can be seen throughout the OT (e.g., the false prophets).”

“Urged by the serpent, the first human beings eat of the forbidden fruit. Human beings, who had been God-oriented, now became self-oriented...In the profound use of language in this chapter, the serpent represents the power of evil, namely, sin. Thus, this enmity points forward to the continued opposition between good and evil (cf. 4:7) and to the conflict between believers and unbelievers, which is one of the main themes in the OT.” (Paul)

Genesis 3:14-15

Hamilton feels that “The traditional translation – 'cursed are you above all cattle' – makes little sense...What is imposed on the serpent is alienation from the other members of the animal world, hence the translation 'banned' rather than 'cursed.'”

“In the first part of the curse the focus seems to be on the animal used in the temptation. A comparison used in the construction shows that the serpent would be cursed more than the rest of the animals. All creation would now lie under a curse, but the serpent more so for his part in the crime. The use of the comparative degrees recalls Genesis 3:1, where we were told the serpent was more crafty than all the other animals. The punishment was thus talionic [i.e. the punishment fits the crime].” (Ross)

“The punishment of the snake (v. 14) must not be understood as meaning that at one time it had legs. Rather, what had once seemed natural and beautiful would now be a perpetual reminder of what it had once done.” (Ellison)

Kline: “Satan's instrument, slithering in the dust, subject to trampling, becomes a symbol of his humiliation and condemnation.”

Wenham discusses the directive by God: 'On your belly you must go' by stating that “it may be noted that according to the classification of animals found in Lev 11 and Deut 14, the snake must count as an archetypal unclean animal. Its swarming, writhing locomotion puts it at the farthest point from those pure animals that can be offered in sacrifice. Within the world of OT animal symbolism a snake is an obvious candidate for an anti-God symbol, notwithstanding its creation by God.”

He adds, “The only parallel to this phrase is Lev 11:42 which brands all such creatures as unclean. It is doubtful whether this implies that snakes once had legs to walk like other animals, an idea expressed in [early Jewish sources] and periodically since. Rather, 'the narrator...contemplates the present behavior of the snake and sees in it a divine curse (Gunkel). Sjoberg...suggests this shows that the snake was actually a chameleon, which has legs and travels on its belly.”

And just to add another bit of uncertainty into the debate regarding walking snakes, there are two pieces of interesting information. (1) Ancient Jewish seals picture snakes with sets of wings. Was the snake punished by having his wings removed? (2) Fossils from Australia have provided our first evidence that snakes once had hind legs.

Stallman points out that the snake is “distinguished from the other animals in the garden in that it is aware of divine matters, has the power of speech, and is clearly not 'good' (1:31)...The curse on the snake (3:14-15) is not an etiology [i.e. the attribution of the cause or reason for something, often expressed in terms of historical or mythical explanation] concerning the age-old antipathy between human beings and snakes, but a rich theological statement full of reversals. Once more crafty ('arum) than all other animals, now it is more cursed ('arur), once superior, now it is inferior and must forever crawl on its belly...the text...may simply be interpreting its natural mode of locomotion. Eating dust is characteristic of an enemy's humiliation (Ps 72:9; Isa 49:23; Mic 7:17)...”

Stallman adds, “Ironically, when Satan tempted Jesus, he lifted a text from a psalm that, in fact, promises victory over the evil serpent (Ps 91:11-13; cf. Gen 3:15).” This fits in well with what Van Dam has said: “The enmity of which God spoke in Gen 3:15 was a curse for the serpent but a great blessing for Adam and Eve and the believing seed. The full victory implied in these words was initially fulfilled in Christ's suffering, death, and resurrection. The final fulfillment comes. Cf. e.g., Rom 16:20; Col 2:15; Heb 2:14; Rev 12; 20:9-10.”