Of snakes and salvation

[hfd]

We are told in the book of Exodus that the Israelites are upset with Moses and tell Aaron to make some gods. He obliges by making the Golden Calf. God becomes upset with this as it has only been a short while that these good folks got the message not to have idols.

Later on, in Numbers, we discover that the same folks are being set upon by fiery serpents. Evidently these snakes are creating quite a negative situation. God tells Moses to make a snake of brass, affix it to a ploe and raise it so all can view it. If bitten one need only to look upon the snake to survive.

Jesus reportedly said, 'And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness even so must the son of man be lifted up.' We are then led into John 3:16, perhaps the best known verse in the NT. There is no doubt that a seeming convoluted scenario is presented in these three issues.

I've yet to hear an explanation that satisfies my curiosity. First, the Decalogue commands us not to make graven images. For that, the Israelites are admonished for creating a Golden Calf. Yet, they're told to make a graven image in the form of a serpent and to look upon that image for salvation against snake bites. Finally, Jesus uses this imagery and applies it to himself.

Throughout the Bible Satan is equated with a serpent from Genesis to the dragon of Revelation. Yet, we have clear evidence that at least twice in the Judaic/Christian Biblically based tradition the serpent is a symbol of salvation. Anyone care to attempt to reconcile what seems to be a convoluted situation.

Thank you

[bizzt]

We are told in the book of Exodus that the Israelites are upset with Moses and tell Aaron to make some gods. He obliges by making the Golden Calf. God becomes upset with this as it has only been a short while that these good folks got the message not to have idols.

Later on, in Numbers, we discover that the same folks are being set upon by fiery serpents. Evidently these snakes are creating quite a negative situation. Gold tells Moses to make a snake of bras, affix it to a ploe and raise it so all can view it. If bitten one need only to look upon the snake to survive.

Jesus reportedly said, 'And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness even so must the son of man be lifted up.' We are then led into John 3:16, perhaps the best known verse in the NT. There is no doubt that a seeming convoluted scenario is presented in these three issues.

I've yet to hear an explanation that satisfies my curiosity. First, the Decalogue commands us not to make graven images. For that, the Israelites are admonished for creating a Golden Calf. Yet, they're told to make a graven image in the form of a serpent and to look upon that image for salvation against snake bites. Finally, Jesus uses this imagery and applies it to himself.

Throughout the Bible Satan is equated with a serpent from Genesis to the dragon of Revelation. Yet, we have clear evidence that at least twice in the Judaic/Christian Biblically based tradition the serpent is a symbol of salvation. Anyone care to attempt to reconcile what seems to be a convoluted situation.

Thank you

Num 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
Num 21:9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


First off can you show me where one looks upon the Serpent for Salvation. You must be reading into something a little to much. The People of Israel looked upon the Brass Serpent to be healed. Jesus correlates this to himself by saying That whosoever Believeth in him should not perish but have Eternal Life. I see no issue with this? The Serpent is not salvation in the Old Testament and certainly is not in the New Testament. Am I missing something here?

[FFC]

We are told in the book of Exodus that the Israelites are upset with Moses and tell Aaron to make some gods. He obliges by making the Golden Calf. God becomes upset with this as it has only been a short while that these good folks got the message not to have idols.

Later on, in Numbers, we discover that the same folks are being set upon by fiery serpents. Evidently these snakes are creating quite a negative situation. Gold tells Moses to make a snake of bras, affix it to a ploe and raise it so all can view it. If bitten one need only to look upon the snake to survive.

Jesus reportedly said, 'And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness even so must the son of man be lifted up.' We are then led into John 3:16, perhaps the best known verse in the NT. There is no doubt that a seeming convoluted scenario is presented in these three issues.

I've yet to hear an explanation that satisfies my curiosity. First, the Decalogue commands us not to make graven images. For that, the Israelites are admonished for creating a Golden Calf. Yet, they're told to make a graven image in the form of a serpent and to look upon that image for salvation against snake bites. Finally, Jesus uses this imagery and applies it to himself.

Throughout the Bible Satan is equated with a serpent from Genesis to the dragon of Revelation. Yet, we have clear evidence that at least twice in the Judaic/Christian Biblically based tradition the serpent is a symbol of salvation. Anyone care to attempt to reconcile what seems to be a convoluted situation.

Thank you

Num 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
Num 21:9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


First off can you show me where one looks upon the Serpent for Salvation. You must be reading into something a little to much. The People of Israel looked upon the Brass Serpent to be healed. Jesus correlates this to himself by saying That whosoever Believeth in him should not perish but have Eternal Life. I see no issue with this? The Serpent is not salvation in the Old Testament and certainly is not in the New Testament. Am I missing something here?

I agree. In addition to that, it was not an idol. They were not told to worship it like one would an idol.

[hfd]

"First off can you show me where one looks upon the Serpent for Salvation. You must be reading into something a little to much. The People of Israel looked upon the Brass Serpent to be healed. Jesus correlates this to himself by saying That whosoever Believeth in him should not perish but have Eternal Life. I see no issue with this? The Serpent is not salvation in the Old Testament and certainly is not in the New Testament. Am I missing something here?"

Salvation in the sense that one would not die from the snake bite. Analogy to the salvation of 'everlasting life' is obvious when one considers that Jesus pointed to the serpent in the wilderness in his prediction of his fate.

Secondly, God commanded not to make idols. the Jews were reprimanded for the Golden Calf, an idol. Certainly the serpent was an idol, and one of veneration. By looking at it one was saved from death.

Don't you find it intresting that Satan, throughout the Bible, is equated with the serpent, yet, on two occasions salvation/lifesaving is related to the serpent. And, in one case the very personage of Jesus is.

There is a correlation to be found in Meso American religions. Quetzalcoatl , the feathered serpent, was among other things the great benefactor. It was believed he would return and reclaim his empire.

[hfd]

"I agree. In addition to that, it was not an idol. They were not told to worship it like one would an idol."

Yet, the imge would provide protection from the venom of the snakes. They were to look upon that image as their protector. It is splitting hairs at the extreme best to say they were not worshiping the serpent of Moses.

[FFC]

"I agree. In addition to that, it was not an idol. They were not told to worship it like one would an idol."

Yet, the imge would provide protection from the venom of the snakes. They were to look upon that image as their protector. It is splitting hairs at the extreme best to say they were not worshiping the serpent of Moses.

It occurs to me that it wasn't their protector as much as a healing prop used by God. If they were worshipping it they would be putting it before God. All they were told to do was look at it...of course I'm thinking there must have been some faith required to God who provided this antidote to there sinfulness.

So what conclusions are you drawing from your origional question?

[zoegirl]

"I agree. In addition to that, it was not an idol. They were not told to worship it like one would an idol."

Yet, the imge would provide protection from the venom of the snakes. They were to look upon that image as their protector. It is splitting hairs at the extreme best to say they were not worshiping the serpent of Moses.

So what conclusions are you drawing from your origional question?

Their obedience protected them, not the serpent. They were faithful to God's commandment. God could have asked them to turn around three times, spit on the ground, and do the hokey-pokey and there would have been nothing special about spitting or doing the hokey pokey. It was the fact that they did it. They trusted God's word adn did as He asked. The IMAGE did not provide protection.

[Gman]

"First off can you show me where one looks upon the Serpent for Salvation. You must be reading into something a little to much. The People of Israel looked upon the Brass Serpent to be healed. Jesus correlates this to himself by saying That whosoever Believeth in him should not perish but have Eternal Life. I see no issue with this? The Serpent is not salvation in the Old Testament and certainly is not in the New Testament. Am I missing something here?"

Salvation in the sense that one would not die from the snake bite. Analogy to the salvation of 'everlasting life' is obvious when one considers that Jesus pointed to the serpent in the wilderness in his prediction of his fate.

Secondly, God commanded not to make idols. the Jews were reprimanded for the Golden Calf, an idol. Certainly the serpent was an idol, and one of veneration. By looking at it one was saved from death.

Don't you find it intresting that Satan, throughout the Bible, is equated with the serpent, yet, on two occasions salvation/lifesaving is related to the serpent. And, in one case the very personage of Jesus is.

There is a correlation to be found in Meso American religions. Quetzalcoatl , the feathered serpent, was among other things the great benefactor. It was believed he would return and reclaim his empire.

A repeat..

The command against making "carved images" was a command against making idols. God did not command Moses to make an idol for the people to worship but a symbol to which they could look in faith and be healed. Later, the people made this symbol into an idol. But this does not make the symbol wrong. After all, people have worshiped the Bible. This does not mean that the Bible was intended by God as an idol.

Further, not all "images" are idols. Religious art contains images but is not thereby idolatrous. God also instructed Moses to make cherubim (angels) for the ark, but they were not idols. There is a difference between a God-appointed representation of symbol (e.g., the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper) and a man-made idol..

[hfd]

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God" (Exodus 20:3-5).

The above seems pretty specific to me. I find it hard to believe that the Israelites were sophiticated enough to not believe that the serpent, in fact, was protecting them.

[Canuckster1127]

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God" (Exodus 20:3-5).

The above seems pretty specific to me. I find it hard to believe that the Israelites were sophiticated enough to not believe that the serpent, in fact, was protecting them.

Repeating something doesn't really add to the argument. God is the one who commanded the making of the snake and the "salvation" found in the act was in the obedience to God, not worship of the snake image.

Do you deny that God commanded or the that the Israelites obeyed?

It appears to me you're seeking to find fault with God or attempting to deny the inspiration of the text.

[hfd]

"Repeating something doesn't really add to the argument. God is the one who commanded the making of the snake and the "salvation" found in the act was in the obedience to God, not worship of the snake image.

Do you deny that God commanded or the that the Israelites obeyed?

It appears to me you're seeking to find fault with God or attempting to deny the inspiration of the text."

Sometimes it's neccessary to repeat to enure that a focus is not lost. The commandment is clear. It is also clear to anyone not bound to a defense that the brass serpent was indeed an image supposedly capable of protecting the people from the effects of snake bite. hat was the 'salvation' in the act.

People who bow down and cross themselves in front of a statue of Mary and then pray are doing exactly what the Israelites did. They are, for whatever reason, directing their pleas to a graven image.

As to whether or not God commanded is a question that must be decided by the individual. Why would the God who commanded not to do something later on command that it be done?. That is simply not consistent with the idea of a perfect God.

Also, why would a symbol that is associated with the evil one be annointed by God to communicate wth his chosen people? Not trying to be difficult here. I'm human. But, I see something here that simply doesn't seem logical. I've yet to see an explanation that makes it so. I see an attempted defense for a glaring incongruity.

[zoegirl]

"Repeating something doesn't really add to the argument. God is the one who commanded the making of the snake and the "salvation" found in the act was in the obedience to God, not worship of the snake image.

Do you deny that God commanded or the that the Israelites obeyed?

It appears to me you're seeking to find fault with God or attempting to deny the inspiration of the text."

Sometimes it's neccessary to repeat to enure that a focus is not lost. The commandment is clear. It is also clear to anyone not bound to a defense that the brass serpent was indeed an image supposedly capable of protecting the people from the effects of snake bite. hat was the 'salvation' in the act.

People who bow down and cross themselves in front of a statue of Mary and then pray are doing exactly what the Israelites did. They are, for whatever reason, directing their pleas to a graven image.

As to whether or not God commanded is a question that must be decided by the individual. Why would the God who commanded not to do something later on command that it be done?. That is simply not consistent with the idea of a perfect God.

Also, why would a symbol that is associated with the evil one be annointed by God to communicate wth his chosen people? Not trying to be difficult here. I'm human. But, I see something here that simply doesn't seem logical. I've yet to see an explanation that makes it so. I see an attempted defense for a glaring incongruity.

All right, let's repeat this again....God did not command them to worship the snake, merely to obey Him when He told them that if they "looked" at the snake, they would live.

[hfd]

"All right, let's repeat this again....God did not command them to worship the snake, merely to obey Him when He told them that if they "looked" at the snake, they would live."

But he did commnd them to make a graven image. That alone is certainly difficult to justify with the 2nd commandment. Granted, they did not 'bow down' to the serpent but, they certainly expected it to save them from death from snake venom after being bitten.

Sorry, but the image is clearly being used in a religious sense. God, according to the book of Exodus commanded it it to be so. This after the admonishment for Aaron's Golden Calf. It contradicts common sense to believe the image did not violate the second commandment. Why would God not say pray to me and I'll protect you from the bite of the serpent?

Let me ask you this. Do you believe kneeling to a statue of Mary in prayer while believing she is the Queen of Heaven, a definition found in the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a form of idolatry? Does that carved image have a religious significance that violates the second commandment?

[FFC]

Let me ask you this. Do you believe kneeling to a statue of Mary in prayer while believing she is the Queen of Heaven, a definition found in the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a form of idolatry? Does that carved image have a religious significance that violates the second commandment?

Byblos? Where are you?

[Canuckster1127]

Let me ask you this. Do you believe kneeling to a statue of Mary in prayer while believing she is the Queen of Heaven, a definition found in the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a form of idolatry? Does that carved image have a religious significance that violates the second commandment?

Byblos? Where are you?

There's no correlation between the one and the other.

He's taking the prohibition against idolatry which is Biblical, seeking to extend it beyond its intent and by it declaring God as violating his own law in a second instance and then jumping to an unrelated third issue in an attempt to declare a parallel between one and two.

This is commonly known as a category error.

For some however, it is a debating technique to bail out of an issue rather than focusing upon and bringing the original issue to a conclusion.