|
|
|
Feedback archive → Feedback 2007 Serpents and dust; Christians and saltThis week we feature two enquiries. The first is from Alex L of Scotland who asks about snakes eating dust (Genesis 3:14), to which Carl Wieland responds. The second is from Fiona S of New South Wales, Australia, who asks about salt losing its saltiness (Matthew 5:13), to which Andrew Lamb responds. Serpents and dust
I was doing a Bible study on the scripture below when I came across your article [Snakes do eat dust!]. Am I right in thinking that snakes sample the dust of the earth in order to guide them to their prey? Am I also right in thinking that dust itself has nothing to do with the animal’s diet? Sincerely Alex L … Scotland UK Genesis 3:14 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: Dear Mr L / Dear Alex Thanks for your enquiry about the item I wrote for Creation magazine many years ago. You wrote: I was doing a Bible study on the scriptures below when I came across your article [Snakes do eat dust!]. Am I right in thinking that snakes sample the dust of the earth in order to guide them to their prey? Absolutely. Just as the article indicated. And as the article also indicated, the dust particles are cleaned off the animal’s tongue. Most of the dust would therefore be swallowed and pass through the digestive tract. That is why it said that snakes really do eat dust. Of course, the dust mostly (though not exclusively) consists of inorganic components which are mostly not digested, and mostly (though not exclusively—minerals are a component of all animal diets) are not for nutrition—e.g. a sand particle will just pass straight through the digestive tract. So the article clearly points out the purpose of the dust being taken on board, i.e. not nutritional, but also points out that snakes really do eat dust—they take it in their mouth and it passes through the digestive tract. It is of course easy to see the word ‘eat’ as being strictly to do with nutrition, but that is not necessarily so. We talk of someone ‘eating glass’ in a performance, and certain human cultures (and some animal groups) habitually eat certain types of dirt, mostly clay soils (known as geophagy, and it does have a side benefit, it is believed, both in correcting certain mineral deficiencies and in protecting against some parasitic disease). [See box below for an account of hunger-induced geophagy. Ed.] Am I also right in thinking that dust itself has nothing to do with the animal’s diet? As above—the key is in the meaning attributed to the word diet—the dust does not significantly contribute to the animal’s nutrition, so the answer would be no, it has nothing to do with the diet in the sense of nutrition. But if one could say that certain humans incorporate clay as a part of their diet (and that is a common and a reasonable way of putting it, because someone’s diet can also be a description of the sum total of what they put in their mouth, swallow and pass through the digestive tract) then the answer is yes, it does. The key point though, was whether it was reasonable for the Bible to say that snakes eat dust, and given that the dust particles are put in their mouth, then later swallowed and passed through the digestive tract, I think it is. Having said that, the article itself pointed out that it would not be unreasonable for ‘eat dust’ to be seen as a metaphor for snakes having to live right down close to the ground. At the time, I recall that we thought it was interesting enough to pass on, though not earth-shattering. Sincerely Alex L … Scotland UK Kind regards, Managing Director In response to this feedback, Jean L of USA, a veterinarian, wrote: An interesting factoid related to Carl’s weekend feedback response: In the U.S. many hogs are raised ‘off the ground’. The pigs (babies) develop anemia if they are not given iron shots because the sows’ milk is low in iron and, unlike hogs raised on dirt, they do not get the necessary iron. So dirt can have a significant effect in some instances. (I have no idea if this is true for snakes.) Christians and saltPhoto by M Disdero, wikipedia.org
Salt was a valuable commodity in biblical times, and Roman soldiers were sometimes paid in salt. The Latin (Roman) word for salt was salarium, and this gave rise to the modern English words salary1 and soldier, soldier coming via the French solde meaning pay.2 Dear Sir /Madam, Re: Mark 9:50a “Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltiness, wherewith will ye season it?” I have often wondered about this statement, since the salt that we eat is just an inorganic chemical—sodium chloride, not an organic spice. How can salt lose its saltiness, please? (I ask because, at a friend’s home recently, I compared some old salt with some new salt, and the latter did seem to have more flavour. Was I imagining this?) Thank you for answering, and God bless you. from Fiona Smith Dear Fiona Thank you for your email of 31 August, submitted via our website. In olden and ancient times, refined salt of the sort common today was rare. In many ancient cultures, most of their salt came from mines, in the form of solid stone blocks. (Incidentally, the massive deposits of rock salt found around the world are difficult to explain by uniformitarian processes, but can be accounted for by catastrophic models, consistent with the biblical Flood.3–9 ) Their salt was typically unrefined, containing a high proportion of impurities—silt, clays, and other minerals. If the sodium chloride had leached away, by being exposed to rain for example, then the remaining residue ‘salt’ could become worthless. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says the following about ‘salt losing its saltiness’ (Mark 9:50): [like salt] Jesus’ disciples must be a blessing and preservative in the world ‘The Synoptics all record sayings in which Jesus compared His disciples to salt and refers to the uselessness of salt that has lost its salinity. Mt. 5:13 emphasizes that [like salt] Jesus’ disciples must be a blessing and preservative in the world; Mk. 9:50 emphasizes that they must be faithful to their covenant relationship with one another; and Lk. 14:34 emphasizes that they must maintain their allegiance to Christ. ‘… [I]t should be noted that the salt from the Dead Sea region was generally contaminated with other minerals; thus the salt could be dissolved out of this mixture, leaving a tasteless substance. It was important to take rock salt from the inner layers of mines, since the outer layers could lose their salinity with exposure. Although its impurities made salt from the DEAD SEA inferior to most sea salts, its accessibility (it could simply be picked up along the shore) made it the main source of salt for Palestine.’10 And here’s what Henry Morris says in The New Defender’s Study Bible: ‘Luke 14:34 lost his savour. Pure salt cannot lose its savor (or “saltiness”), but the salt commonly used in the ancient world was rock salt, containing various impurities. As the true salt was leached away, or otherwise removed, the so-called “salt” could indeed lose its savor.’ (I ask because, at a friend’s home recently, I compared some old salt with some new salt, and the latter did seem to have more flavour. Was I imagining this?) Fine-grained salt could potentially be perceived as saltier than coarser-grained salt due to the greater surface area, enabling more salt to dissolve in the saliva and reach the salt receptors on the tongue. Chemical processes go faster if a reactant is in powder or fine grain form than they do if it is in a solid block, due to the greater surface area enabling more of the reacting molecules to come in contact. Jesus’ comment about salt has relevance for the church. Declining numbers in some denominations testify to their blandness. Removing the salt of pure biblical doctrines—Creation, the Fall, the Flood, etc.—can have a devastating effect, leaving a residue heavy with the impurities of extra-biblical doctrines and traditions of men, and lacking in palatability to those zealously seeking God. Yours sincerely, Information Officer Sent to the salt minesDuring the Soviet communist era, hundreds of thousands of Christians and other ‘enemies of the state’ were sent to slave labour camps (the GULág* Archipelago described by Alexander Isayevich Solzhenitsyn (1918–2008)), with many prisoners being forced to mine salt at remote locations in Siberia. This is reflected in the darkly ominous idiom ‘sent to the salt mines’. Those who died in the GULág camps from starvation, disease, and torture constituted the bulk of the scores of millions of people murdered by Stalin. See Evolutionary genocide. Mass murder of this sort continues today in the similar camps in communist North Korea, which were ‘built according to a Stalinist model’ and ‘continue to be run that way’, with forced labour, deliberate starvation, and other evils.11 Former prisoner Soon Ok Lee relates how, driven by hunger, she and fellow prisoners ate clay, with those who ate too much dying in pain as a result.12 One of the places she was imprisoned at was Kyo-hwa-so No. 1 camp at Kaechon (click to see spy satellite photo). Forgiveness and caring that Lee observed amongst Christian prisoners there in the face of cruel and brutal atrocities was a major factor in her later conversion to Christianity after escaping from North Korea. The North Korean government regards Christians as the enemy, with North Korean leader Kim Il Sung declaring in the 1990’s that Christians must be annihilated. Anyone discovered to be a Christian in North Korea faces almost certain death in a concentration camp.13 Jesus told his followers they were the salt of the earth and the light of the world (Matthew 5:13–14). The nighttime photo above constitutes a dramatic pictorial allegory of this, with predominantly Christian South Korea bathed in light while Stalinist North Korea languishes in physical and spiritual darkness. Related articlesFurther readingReferences
Published: 20 October 2007(GMT+10) |

