Proof that Genesis 3:14 is nonsense

Snakes lost their legs as a result of Evolution,
not because they were cursed by God.
"14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:"
A 113-million-year-old fossil from Brazil is the first four-legged snake that scientists have ever seen. Several other fossil snakes have been found with hind limbs, but the new find is estimated to be a direct ancestor of modern snakes.
Click here to read the rest of this article and watch the video.


  1. The other irony is that snakes became more successful predators after losing their legs. It was hardly a divine punishment.

    This fossil find is fantastic. I'm assuming at 113mya this snake lived among dinosaurs!

  2. By implication, if Genesis 3:14 is not inspired by a supernatural deity, the other curses from God to Adam and Eve are also invented myth and fable. That means that The apostle Paul's theology concerning the atonement is meaningless.

    This fossil is one of the most damning finds that modern human discovery has ever made concerning the human only origin of the Bible. Not only does it ruin the Christadelphian case for inspiration, but it also destroys the Christadelphian Evolutionary Creationism theology about the first human family that God made a covenant with.

    Ken Gilmore et al will have to beat another hasty retreat and admit that not only Genesis chapter one is not literal, but chapters two and three are also not factual. They will have to come up with another far-fetched explanation as to what it all means.

    With every modern human discovery the Christadelphian case crumbles and decays. Christadelphianism is a barely living corpse that is rotting away to nothing.

    1. hang on a minute, where in genesis does it say that the snake had legs? It doesnt. All it says is that the snake will go on its belly for the rest of its life- any supposition about its pre-curse morphology is entirely speculative. the only thing that is ruined is a speculative interpretation of a passage that may be literal or may be parable. The lesson of the passage remains intact irrespective- that any opposition to the will of God is sin, and that the result of such sin is death.
      Interpreting a text as literal and then finding it is parable does not ruin the case for inspiration, it just means we misunderstood the genre of the text

    2. The mušḫuššu (𒈲𒄭𒄊 was a Babylonian walking serpent god at the time of the Hebrew exile in Babylon. It can be seen on the Ishtar Gate of Babylon. See:

      This appears to be the origin of the Biblical myth of the serpent in Genesis, as are all of the other Genesis myths to be found sourced from what the Jews observed in Babylon during the exile.

    3. Roger,
      If you read Irving Finkel`s excellent book "The Ark before Noah", you will find much else of what the Jews learnt (if fact were allowed to study) when in Babylonian captivity, which prompted their inclusion being in the writings of what we have in Genesis. Finkel studied Cuneiform at uni under a CD brother, by the way.

    4. I meant to write "in" fact, not "if". See Daniel 1 vs3-5

  3. Fascinating, thanks for that. In that case the serpent would fit neatly into the account as a polemical figure- it is the false deities in the form of a serpent god with powers of reason who challenge the word of God in Eden; this neatly explains why the snake had rational thought- it was not a literal animal, but a symbolic representation of idolatrous gods. The tragedy is that Adam and Eve are deceived by the idol and its selfish anti-God reasoning; the triumph is that God exerts his greater power over it condemning it to writhe in dust until it dies. As such it becomes a powerful element of the polemic establishing God's ultimate supremacy over all false gods and all evil thinking.
    Never saw that before.Thx

    1. let me get this straight in my head. - The serpent of Genesis is a does that make Adam and Eve part of the same metaphor? If so, how does sin enter the world? Or is that also a metaphor?

      Is God also a metaphor? If not, why not, as he is in the same metaphorical story as the serpent. Was the creation story a metaphor and if not why not? Where does the metaphor end and reality begin and how do we know that you are interpreting all this correctly and not just making it up?

    2. Roger,
      you write " . . .a powerful element of the polemic establishing God`s ultimate supremacy over all false gods".
      You write . . ."never saw that before".
      What you didn`t see is that in Babylonian captivity the Jews were surrounded by all sorts of Babylonian (false) gods. A god for health, a god for weather, a god for war, a god for this, that and the other.
      It was a masterstroke of the captives to create a better god, who was god of ALL things, including creation.
      That is the god they placed in their writings. the god we have in Genesis.

    3. When are Christadelphians going to learn that there is abundant archaeological evidence that virtually ALL of the Jewish beliefs are routed in paganism, as are the Christian beliefs. El and Yahweh were pagan Gods with El being the chief Canaanite god. The pagan Yahweh even had a female consort. As the Hebrews gradually diverged from their Canaanite origins (there was no "Exodus" from Egypt) they reworked Canaanite myths and beliefs and the resulting belief system slowly diverged from it's pagan origins until in the time of the Babylonian exile there was a fresh injection of Mesopotamian pagan thinking and mythology (creation, flood, man made from clay, tower of Babel (Babylon) etc) that together with the Rabbinic method of belief control and teaching finalised the Judaism that we know today.

      Christians did the same thing with Greek and Roman paganism which resulted in the Christianity and Christadelphianism that now exists.

      "God" has nothing to do with any of this except as a creation of the human mind. "Faith" and "belief" are merely human superstition fueled by ignorance and circular reasoning to produce the ridiculous and false notion of modern day religions.


To become a blog member please email us:

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.