I want to start out with a caveat/warning…my conclusion at the bottom of this post uses very abrasive language and for good reason (which i do not think needs to be explained as the reason is self evident given this topics theme)
Ok, so with that out of the way, on with the post…
Im referring in the Topic title to the Isle of Malta poisonus serpent biting of the apostle Paul account as researched and recorded by Luke in Acts 28
1Once we were safely ashore, we learned that the island was called Malta.**3Paul gathered a bundle of sticks, and as he laid them on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself to his hand. 4When the islanders saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, “Surely this man is a murderer. Although he was saved from the sea, Justicea has not allowed him to live.” 5But Paul shook the creature off into the fire and suffered no ill effects. 6The islanders were expecting him to swell up or suddenly drop dead. But after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god.
Are there any venomous snakes on Malta?
St Paul’s viper has been identified by most Maltese traditionalistsas “il-lifgħa” (the Leopard snakeZamenis situla). The fact that this species is not venomous has not deterred them. “St Paul caused it to lose its venom when he came to Malta” is their usual explanation. Few want to know that the Leopard snake also lives in much of southern Europe and there is it venomous. Even fewer understand that a venomous species would face extinction if it lost its ability to incapacitate its prey quickly with venom.
A more reasonable explanation given is that there could have been a venomous Maltese snake which has since become extinct. However, there is no evidence – fossil, documented or otherwise – of a dangerous indigenous viper inhabiting Malta during historical times. And there is no evidence of an extinction event (such as the introduction of a predator or strongly competing species) that could wipe out an entire population of vipers, while leaving other species of snakes alive.
My understanding is that the concensus is that there has never been evidence of any poisonous snake on the Isle of Malta. So the question remains, is the apostle Luke lying about such a significant event as a life or death miracle?
If so, how can one reconcile this dilemma given that here is a New Testament reference to an event that appears to be scientifically proven to be bull?