Was the Serpent all that bad?

It’s very strange to think of creatures dwelling among humans and conversing with them in a way we’d understand. I’m a vegan, so presumably I’m one of those who have utmost respect for animals (or ‘non-human animals’ as some of my more radical veggie brethren would phrase it). Yet even with that respect comes a certain arrogance that we men and women are special in certain ways—created in God’s image, able to speak in complex language that vary according to geography and culture, able to discern the realities of an omniscient God and the concept of the human spirit, and the ability to tell right from wrong.

So to hear about a serpent who was “more crafty than any other beast” and who could cunningly ask “Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?” understandably encourages skepticism in the non-contemporary reader. I think the absurdity (Raj described it as fantasy) of a talking snake has led many Christians to suggest that the serpent is actually Satan. Daniel referenced this. I don’t see any evidence for this however. I think it’s weird but fair to assume that the serpent is indeed a talking creature. Perhaps things were very different in Eden.

What’s striking to me about the serpent’s proposition is that it is, in fact, true. Certainly Woman—she has not yet been named—and Adam are disobedient to the Lord, but, when they eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil they DON’T DIE. Not in the physical sense anyway. Perhaps their innocence has died, or their special relationship with God, or their naturally symbiotic relationship with the earth and its creatures. But in the simple, life vs. death manner of thinking, Adam and his wife do not surely die.

Would you rather die or be a paradisiacal refugee?