Nachash (Genesis 3) - Serpent or Shiny One?

[Tintin]

Having grown up in a Christian household, I'd always seen the serpent in Genesis 3 as being something similar to a snake. Later in my teens, I viewed it as possibly a lizard-like creature, based on the verse where the Lord curses it by making it crawl on it's belly. Once again, my understanding has changed. Recently, I've discovered (from reading numerous articles) that the Hebrew word for 'snake' is the same as the word for 'shiny one' - "Nachash". I found this incredibly interesting but I'm not sure what to make of it and whether or not to take the theory seriously. On one hand, most people seem to accept the serpent in Genesis as being a snake, on the other, this theory sounds quite plausible (and more interesting). First of all, the Father of Lies (the Adversary) is sometimes described as a fallen angel of light. Secondly, by my reckoning, it's more plausible for Adam and Eve to be tempted by a being a light (as was Joseph Smith - the Mormon conman) than by a talking snake, since the serpent would have to be possessed by the Adversary and the Bible makes no mention of this (to be fair, there's a lot the Bible doesn't mention). Surely, if no other animal in the Garden talked, Adam and Eve would've questioned their situation the moment the serpent first opened it's mouth! I understand that the Bible tells us precious little about this "nachash". I'm just curious to hear what others think about this revelation.

Is there any truth to the claim, or not?
I especially want to hear from people who have studied the original Hebrew texts and are well-versed in these things (scholarly types).

Anyone? Thanks

Here are several of the resources I've read concerning the topic:
THE RAIN / THE SERPENT OF GENESIS 3.
Job, satan, and the serpent
http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/nachashnotes.pdf

 

[kenisyes]

At the risk of having people hate me, I will add that a Roman legend mentions the undulations of the serpent as being the tempting factor. Serpents are used as a symbol for lightning in Sumerian cylinder seals. "Nachash" translates the Egyptian "Nekh-ba", or "fire serpent", shown in a temple relief at Denderah (Crypt I-C Hathor temple, if I recall correctly) and the base of the serpent jar there is identical with the "xiucoatl" shown in the statues of the giants at Tula. "Xiucoatl" is Aztec for "fire serpent". The Aztecs claim these things are rayguns. If you read the story of Moses and the serpent on the pole in the desert, in Hebrew, you learn that Moses did not do what God told him, but made a different kind of serpent. Also, relating to that story, is the fact that, in Hebrew, the word for brass is Nachshot, which looks like the feminine plural of Nachash.

 

[JGPS]

Where do you get 'shining one' from that? I can see the words relation to hissing, whispering, and enchanting but I can't seem to find 'shining one' outside of mysticism. It's not something you'd find in a concordance.


I always thought he was something like what we'd call a dragon myself rather than a small serpent.

Shining one seems like its something that would come from various mysticism though.

 

[Tintin]

Kenisyes, why would people hate you for saying the above? Because the serpent would've been doing a seductive dance? Haha! So are you saying the "Nachash" was possibly a Pterosaur-like creature? Also, I didn't realise that Moses created a different kind of serpent to the one God asked of him. Is it more obvious in the Hebrew originals? Are the links I provided not that reliable? So a flying serpent, not a being of light? Thanks for your contributions, Kenisyes!

JGPS, I received my information from the links in my beginning post. I'm not a theologian or bible scholar, I'm just interested in mysterious parts of the Bible. I put this thread out here in the hopes that I'd find a more conclusive answer. I'm not going to insert Jewish mysticism (eg. Lilith) into my Biblical beliefs because of this. Just curious, not trying to cause trouble.

 

[kenisyes]

No, the links are fine. I don't agree with just everything, but to get you thinking, great. I was adding to it, not criticizing anything. Snake is a good deal more complex than people today realize. I've seen book-length scholoarly studies of it. Here's the bit on Moses from one of my books, with the verse numbers, and accurate translations from Hebrew:
In Numbers 21:7, the Hebrews are bitten by snakes. Moses
makes a snake on a pole and it saves them. Years later (II Kings
18:4), the snake from the pole is being worshipped as an idol.
This story makes no sense in English. In Hebrew, the people
were “bitten” (the snake eating motif again) by serafic nachashes.
... Moses prays to God to turn
away the nachash. Note, this is NOT plural....
God tells Moses to build a seraf and put it on A pole. Then
anyone who sees it will be healed. ...
But Moses builds instead a nachash, and put it on THE pole.
... winds up being worshipped as an idol. By the
way, the nachash is made of bronze. In Hebrew, the word for
bronze is nachshat, the feminine form of nachash,...

The link to the whole is http://kenbehrens.com/Ancient Technology.pdf

 

[JGPS]

Yes I saw your references. Even they don't substantiate the 'shining one' position. The first reference even has this in the footnote:

[FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1] It is remarkable that the verb nachash always means to enchant, fascinate, bewitch; or of one having and using occult knowledge.[/SIZE][/FONT]

That's what I'm saying about the word serpents relationship to hissing and whispering. I can substantiate that all over, but thus far I can only find it meaning 'to shine' in mystical literature. None of my go to concordences or scholarly resources mention anything like it, and the root serpent in Genesis is the exact root used for serpent elsewhere where its clearly talking about a plain as day snake.

The word for bronze seems to be the only link to this. And it seems like a pretty loose link here.

Just saying what I can see on the issue. It doesn't really matter to me very much, but my view on it is that a few groups are stretching the connection between words to put their own ideologies in there.

 

[kenisyes]

One more reference. Sanchuniaten, 1200BC Babylonian writer, I am told, says that a serpent can travel at the speed of light.

 

[Tintin]

Ah, cheers, Kenisyes! No worries. I didn't think you were criticizing me. I'm in awe of your Bible knowledge, it's a real blessing so thanks so much for your help. I've always wondered about that part of Numbers (I've only ever read it in English). Something seemed off about it - God basically prompting Moses to create an idol and then later, it leading to the worship of a serpent god, Nehushtan. But then I reasoned that because God allowed it, the act was permitted (of course the fact that it led to idol worship later on, was not). What would be the most accurate English translation for a 'seraf' or 'serafic'?

Also, I found this interesting article on the "Nachash". I realise Answers in Genesis isn't the most scientific of organisations but from a theological perspective this is interesting.
Check it out here:
Did the Serpent Originally Have Legs? - Answers in Genesis

Martin Lutheran's conclusion? The serpent did have legs. “From this some obvious conclusions follow: that before sin the serpent was a most beautiful little animal and most pleasing to man, as little mules, sheep and puppies today; moreover, that it walked upright.”

John Calvin seems to be the only one who believed it was more metaphorical of the Adversary always being at odds with the human race.

 

[Tintin]

JGPS, fair enough. You may be right. I was just putting the topic out here for discussion. Still, I believe the "Nachash" was more than just the snake we have today. Maybe there is some truth to people's musings (eg. Kenisyes).

 

[Tintin]

Kenisyes, also this article by Genesis Park. Very interesting.
The Fiery Flying Serpent | Genesis Park

 

[JGPS]

Kenisyes musings are all pretty hard fact. He's handing out information relating to the topic rather than just opinions. When he presents his opinion it will probably be rather good too. It's the groups that refer to the serpent as the shining one that I find dubious.

On the Sanchuniaten, that creature very much seems like a dragon as well. The only reference I've seen calls it large, long lived, fire breathing, skin shedding, and quick as breath. I haven't seen speed of light, but in the context quick as breath means about the same thing.

 

[Tintin]

Sorry, yes, I worded that badly. I believe Kenisyes' musings are hard fact. I'm thinking less and less of the 'shiny one' theory though. There are numerous reports (ancient and more modern) of dragon/dinosaur-like creatures in the uninhabitable parts of our world. Some of these were likely believed to be gods at the time.

 

[kenisyes]

Ah, cheers, Kenisyes! No worries. I didn't think you were criticizing me. I'm in awe of your Bible knowledge, it's a real blessing so thanks so much for your help. I've always wondered about that part of Numbers (I've only ever read it in English). Something seemed off about it - God basically prompting Moses to create an idol and then later, it leading to the worship of a serpent god, Nehushtan. But then I reasoned that because God allowed it, the act was permitted (of course the fact that it led to idol worship later on, was not). What would be the most accurate English translation for a 'seraf' or 'serafic'?

Also, I found this interesting article on the "Nachash". I realise Answers in Genesis isn't the most scientific of organisations but from a theological perspective this is interesting.
Check it out here:
Did the Serpent Originally Have Legs? - Answers in Genesis

Martin Lutheran's conclusion? The serpent did have legs. “From this some obvious conclusions follow: that before sin the serpent was a most beautiful little animal and most pleasing to man, as little mules, sheep and puppies today; moreover, that it walked upright.”

John Calvin seems to be the only one who believed it was more metaphorical of the Adversary always being at odds with the human race.

The trouble with all the sources in that article, is that they all from after 1500 AD. MOre than enough time for middle ages' legends to confuse the issue. Have you ever looked at Medieval Bestiaries? Fantasy when people had lost the Scripture knowledge in the burned down libraries.

 

[kenisyes]

Kenisyes, also this article by Genesis Park. Very interesting.
The Fiery Flying Serpent | Genesis Park

I looked up the Hebrew on Is. 14:29. The cockatrice, I can't translate. tsadee-peh-ayin. tsadee-peh-aleph is "to shine"; tsadee-pej-ayin-vav-nun(sophit) is "serpent". The three words sound like derivatives in English, but in Hebrew they are considered different. You can see from this where the ideas come from. "Flying" is mem-ayin-vav-peh-peh (sofit). "Fly" is ayin-peh-peh, which also means to "double up". mem- is a causative prefix, so this is a serpent caused to fly or double up or a serpent that causes flying or doubling up. The whole passage can be interpreted symbolically, as the evil causing Babylon (whose emblem is a flying serpent) to want to shine out and attack Israel, so there may be nothing in all of this.

If we want to get into comparative serpents, the serpent that Moses' staff turns into at one point is a tannen. This is the creature created on the fifth day and translated "whale" in that context. Written in hieroglyphics, this word is a picture of heaven over the waters.

[I'd better clarify "sofit". Five letters in Hebrew change form when written at the end of a word. The special forms are called "sofit". I added it to be accurate. You can ignore it in interpretation.]

I really think that almost everything everyone is saying is somehow on the worng track. There is something else, that we cannot even imagine in all of this.

 

[Tintin]

Very, very strange. I can just picture Moses throwing down his staff and it turning into a whale! (haha!) Are you able to answer my question about the 'seraf' or 'serafic' and the 'nachash'? What are the differences between the two and how and why does the feminine usage differ from the masculine usage of the word? This is all Hebrew to me! Thanks, again.

 

[kenisyes]

Sorry, I lost it reading the articles: Num. 21:6: ha-nachash-im ha-seraf-im. -im is masculine plural. ha- is "the", but on the second of two nouns more likely means "of". Most likely translation is "nachashes of fire", which is why I say "fiery nachashes".

I am told is it a homonym coicidence that nachshat looks like the feminine plural of nachash, as the vowels are different. My answer is that the vowels are not part of the inspired Hebrew text, and I think it quite a coicidence in verse 9, that Moses' disobeying God, puts up a nachash ha-nachashat, which is also a homonym for serpent (masc.) of serpent (fem.) [Remember every jot an tittle of Torah means something] 2 Ki. 18:4 has the same name.

Generally, in Hebrew, unless there is another usage for the masc./fem., the feminine is the abstract, and the masculine the concrete. Again, I am told this does not apply here, but I am not so certain. I have too many serpents from related cultures that appear to be technological concepts. Like serpents are used as a symbol for lightning in Sumeria, and a brass serpent on a pole would make a great lighning rod.

 

[2LIVE4GOD]

TO TINTIN:
*
you are CORRECT in your understanding of the hebrew word "Nachash" which literally means "SHINY ONE, ENLIGHTENED SHINY BEING, FALLEN ANGEL, ENCHANTER, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY LUCIFER."*
*
in fact*GOD HIMSELF*says so in his HOLY BIBLE as well... so don't stop here... YOU ARE ON THE CORRECT PATH.
*
here is an article written by a Professor on his study of this word... "NACHASH."
*
""""""*in Genesis 3... Eve was NOT talking to a snake at all... the Hebrew word that was translated serpent or snake in Genesis 3... is ha-nachash. the word nachash can function as a noun, a verb, or an adjective. as a noun nachash means snake, so the traditional translation would be possible, but then it contradicts Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14. when nachash is used as a verb it means to practice divination and could also be used in Genesis 3... if Lucifer was using divination to appear as a snake. but the solution comes when we use the word nachash as an adjective because it then means "shining bronze or polished."*the Hebrew word “ha” always means “the”... so "ha-nachash" as an adjective would translate to “the shining one”. we must therefore also consider what is stated in the Holy Bible that angelic or divine beings are described as shining or luminous and at times uses this same word, nachash. in the New Testament the word “serpent” is translated from the Greek word "ophis" but the root word is "optanomai" and means to look at, or behold, to allow one’s self to be seen, to appear just as Eve saw this fallen being before her.*what’s so significant about translating ha-nachash as “the shining one” is that the name Lucifer comes from the Latin Vulgate translation of the Hebrew in Isaiah 14:12, “Helel ben-Shachar” and literally means, “Shining One, son of the Dawn."""""
*
now i can prove this by GOD'S OWN WORD.
*
2 PETER 1:20-21...
[SUP]20*[/SUP]Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
[SUP]21*[/SUP]For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
*
i posted this scripture first to help you RID*YOURSELF*of what YOU OR ANYONE ELSE insists to you or*wants to try and say what is truth by adding or taking away from GOD'S HOLY BIBLE which is GOD'S OWN HOLY WORD written BY GOD HIMSELF in a HOLY BOOK for the world.
*
ALWAYS TRUST GOD'S HOLY BIBLE FOR EVERY ANSWER IS INSIDE THIS HOLY BIBLE PROVIDED BY GOD HIMSELF FOR US TO SEARCH OUT AS TRUTH AND BELIEVE IT AS GOD'S HOLY TRUTH.
*
so in other words... WHAT IT SAYS IS WHAT IT SAYS and IS SPOKEN AND WRITTEN by GOD so the HOLY BIBLE is DIVINELY PERFECT because GOD IS DIVINELY PERFECT.
*
then saying this we know and believe that the*HOLY BIBLE is interwoven from THE BEGINNING TO THE ENDING*like a blanket... every stitch and seam placed for a purpose to reveal a bigger picture... for I AM TOO INTO GOD'S HIDDEN WISDOM ONLY GOD CAN GIVE US.....*
*
GENESIS 3:15...
[SUP]15*[/SUP]And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
*
ask yourself what is enmity?
why is enmity placed between serpent seed and her seed?
what is "it"?
why will "it" bruise serpent seed head?
how and why would the serpent seed have a bruised head?
why does GENESIS 3:15 also lead us to ROMANS 16:20 about the bruisings?
why is it when we run the scripture for *GENESIS 3:15 *it leads us to two other verses being ISAIAH 7:14 and JOHN 8:44?
why does 1 JOHN 3:12 state Cain is from the *wicked one?
who is the wicked one 1 JOHN 3:12 *is talking about?
why does JUDE 1:14 say that Enoch was the 7th son from Adam but when we add Cain Enoch becomes the 8th son?
why does EZEKIEL 28:12-19 *and EZEKIEL 31:8-9 talk *about this*
who is ISAIAH 14:12-15 talking about?
if GOD said that the fallen angels had giants as children from earthly women then... wouldn't that mean Cain is a giant?
*
i have provided all the verses for you and questions even i had asked... so*TRULY SEARCH this out and *let GOD REVEAL ALL THIS TO YOU.....

 

[Tintin]

Very encouraging, thank you. I think I'll further pursue this subject.

 

[Tintin]

Found another interesting article.
http://Found another interesting ar...iny one'? A serpent is so much more ordinary.

Still, if there is any truth to the claim, why haven't any of the English translators translated it as 'shiny one'? A serpent is so much more ordinary.
Guess it might be one of those Behemoth things (a hippo or elephant? Don't make me laugh!)

 

[rachelsedge]

Guess it might be one of those Behemoth things (a hippo or elephant? Don't make me laugh!)

I'm still soaking in everything that has been discussed in this thread (because these were things I had never realized. Man I wish I knew Hebrew/Greek!) but don't even get me started on the Behemoth things! Job is my favorite book but a lot of the time when I read those chapters and the notes down below, I just want to shake whoever wrote it and be like "Really? Did you just read the same thing that I did? Where did you get that??"

Okay. Mini-rant over.