God's judgment on each trespasser (the snake, the woman, and the man) involved both a life function and a relationship.197In each case the punishment corresponded to the nature of the crime.
"Curses are uttered against the serpent and the ground, but not against the man and woman, implying that the blessing has not been utterly lost. It is not until human murder, a transgression against the imago Dei, that a person (Cain) receives the divine curse . . ."198
1. The snake had been crafty (Heb. arum), but now it was cursed (Heb. arur). It had to move on its belly (v. 14). Some commentators take this literally and conclude that the snake had legs before God cursed it.199Others take it figuratively as a reference to the resultant despised condition of the snake.200
2. It would eat dust (v. 14). Since snakes do not literally feed on dust, many interpreters take this statement figuratively. Eating dust is an expression used in other ancient Near Eastern writings to describe the lowest of all forms of life. In the Bible it also describes total defeat (cf. Ps. 72:9; Isa. 49:23; 65:25; Mic. 7:17).201
However, God revealed later through Isaiah that serpents will eat dust during the Millennium (Isa. 65:25). Presently snakes eat plants and animals. Perhaps God will yet fulfill this part of what He predicted here in Genesis concerning snakes in the millennial kingdom. This is a literal interpretation. If this is correct, then perhaps we should also take the former part of the curse literally, namely, that snakes did not travel on their bellies before the Fall. Alternatively Isaiah may have meant that serpents will continue to suffer the curse pronounced on them here even after God lifts the curse on creation generally in the Millennium.
3. There would be antagonism between the serpent and human beings (v. 15a). This obviously exists between snakes and people, but God's intention in this verse seems to include the person behind the snake (Satan) as well as, and even more than, the snake itself.
4. Man would eventually destroy the serpent, though the serpent would wound man (v. 15b). This is a prophecy of the victory of the ultimate "Seed"of the woman (Messiah) over Satan (cf. Rev. 19:1-5; Gal. 3:16, 19; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8).202Most interpreters have recognized this verse as the first biblical promise of the provision of salvation (the protoevangeliumor "first gospel").203The rest of the book, in fact the whole Old Testament, proceeds to point ahead to that seed.
"The snake, for the author, is representative of someone or something else. The snake is represented by his seed.' When that seed' is crushed, the head of the snake is crushed. Consequently more is at stake in this brief passage than the reader is at first aware of. A program is set forth. A plot is established that will take the author far beyond this or that snake and his seed.' It is what the snake and His seed' represent that lies at the center of the author's focus. With that one' lies the enmity' that must be crushed."204
"The text in context provides an outline that is correct and clear in pattern but not complete in all details. Numerous questions are left unanswered. When Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead, the details of the climax were filled in and specified, but the text does not demand to be reinterpreted. Nor does it demand interpretation in a way not suggested in context."205
Another dispensationalist has also warned against reading this verse in the light of later revelation.
"We should be careful not to attribute to the understanding of the recipients of the text a concept that only emerges later. An example here is Genesis 3:15, what some call the first hint of the Gospel,' the protoevangelium. This understanding argues that God predicts that Eve's seed, Jesus, will crush the Serpent, Satan. Now in the context of the development of the theme of Adam's seed in the Bible, this meaning does eventually emerge from the text and is a legitimate reading of the passage. However, it is too specific for the original audience of Genesis. First of all, the early Jewish readers of the text could never have known that Messiah's name would be Jesus. What is more, in the context of the Pentateuch, the coming ofa regal figure for the nation of Israel is at best only alluded to as a minor point (Gen. 49:10). Third, the specific identification of the serpent with Satan is not transparent within the Pentateuch. All these connections emerge only later in the Scripture.
"So what did the text originally mean? It simply pointed to the introduction of chaos into the creation as a result of sin. Nature would now be in conflict with man. A snake, now limited by God's curse to crawl on the ground, would nip at man's heel. Meanwhile, as man attempted to defend himself, he would seek to crush the head of the serpent. Of course, this emphasis fits with the message of Genesis, explaining why God raised up Israel--a nation of grace and promise--through whom He would bless all nations. Such a message also prepares for the New Testament point of the reversal of Adam's work in the second Adam, Jesus Christ."206
God cursed all animals and the whole creation because of the Fall (Rom. 8:20), but He made the snake the most despicable of all the animals for its part in the Fall.
"Words possess power. God's words of blessing and of curse are most powerful. They determine our lives."207
