In Genesis 3, the first humans are deceived by a talking snake. Did animals talk in the beginning, or was there something else going on here? Here are a few ideas about what is happening with the serpent in the garden.
1) Satan is a seraph, which are serpentine, winged heavenly beings, as described in Isaiah 6. Some say that the garden was a space between the spirit and the natural realm. Even the cherubs (similar to seraphs), who are always present in the direct presence of God’s throne, are there guarding the Garden in Eden after the Fall, according to Gen 3:24. So, the talking serpent is a spiritual serpent rather than a natural one. Of course, Satan is referred to as an anointed cherub in Ezekiel 29:14, so some may argue he is not a cherub. There is debate on whether or not cherub and seraph can be interchanged. From a biblical numerology perspective, it seems feasible if we consider the number of seraphs and cherubs. There are always four cherubs throughout the Old Testament (Exodus 25:20 & 1 Kings 6:27, Ezekiel 41:18, Ezekiel 10:14) and two seraphs in Isaiah 6:1-6 around God’s throne, making six creatures in total. Since seven is the number of completion, one could infer that a seraph is missing. Is this Satan? More on this here.
2) The spiritual rebel Satan possesses a natural serpent and made it talk like a person. Whether or not he is a seraph, cherub, angel, or something else is irrelevant. The question is, can a spiritual being with a body possess another creature? Demons don’t have physical bodies, so they must possess other beings. However, the heavenly hosts had bodies, so they don’t possess anything; they just appear with their own bodies. Maybe the rebels of heaven lost their bodies and became demons along with the giants that died in the flood? We know that God made Balaam’s donkey talk in Numbers 22, so maybe other spirit beings can supernaturally impart human language to animals without possession. Rather than possessing the serpent, Satan could have manipulated the serpent in communicating with Eve; this plays into the next theory. More on the various types of the host of heaven here.
3) Like the second theory, but the serpent didn’t literally speak. Instead, he used gestures like slithering up the tree and licking the fruit. Meaning there was no true human language conversation, but the serpent’s actions conjured up thoughts in Eve’s head. Remember Eve added to God’s words in Gen 3:3, by saying they couldn’t even “touch the forbidden tree”, so the serpent could have touched it with its tongue thus proving “God lied”, which would have cast doubt on God’s words even though God didn’t say anything about touching it. Satan is simply using the serpent to communicate the idea of taking the fruit in a natural way.
4) There is another that I heard about, but I am not so sure about this one. The idea is that Genesis 3 is mistranslated. The word nachash (נָחָשׁ) translated as the serpent in Gen 3:1, is translated as the serpent in many other parts of the Bible as well. However, that word has four homographs (words with the exact spelling but different sounds and definitions). The translations are the serpent, copper (or bronze), omen (or enchantment), and divination (or diviner). It is also the name of King Nachash of the Ammonites in 1 Sam 10-12. So, eliminating the Ammonite King and copper, we are left with a serpent, an omen (enchantment), and a diviner (divination). The argument is that the serpent was translated that way in Genesis 3 because the translators assume a diviner is a human, and that couldn’t work since Adam and Eve were the only people. However, the nachash could have been a diviner in reference to Satan as an angel or some other type of heavenly being. In fact, in Job 1:6, Satan appears in the divine council and challenges God on Job’s righteousness. These hosts of heaven are usually depicted as human-looking.
This theory is similar to the first or second one, but Satan is not a heavenly serpent, but rather a humanoid heavenly figure (such as a Son of God or an Angel). The translators thought that “enchanter,” which is usually a human, did not fit, so they assumed it must mean “snake.” There are only two times nachash means omen/enchantment (Numbers 23:23 and Numbers 24:1), both about Balaam’s failed attempts at cursing Israel. The verb “to practice divination” appears 11 times throughout the Torah, 1st and 2nd Kings, and 2nd Chronicles collectively. The problem is that the serpent translation of nachash appears 31 times, so I’m not sure how well this theory holds up. Also, Gen 3:1 says, “The serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild animals [KJV: “beast of the field”] the Lord God had made.” This implies that it was a natural serpentine creature, or at least appeared to be one to Adam and Eve.
For Reference to theory 4:
Nachash (noun) [naw-khawsh] as Serpent (נָחָשׁ)
Nachash (noun) [nekh-awsh’] as Copper/Bronze (נְחָשׁ)
Nachash (noun) [nakh’-ash] as Omen or Enchantment (נַחַשׁ)
Nachash (verb) [naw-khash] to practice divination or sorcery (נָחַשׁ)