Is there any Denomination which think that the "serpent" at the beginning of his existence in Eden is not a bad being? This question raised after my other question here 

Genesis 3:15


  I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your
  offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall
  bruise his heel.


To me (as a non-Christian) the bold sentence in the verse above leads to a conclusion that there is no enmity (yet) between this being and Adam&amp;Eve before the event in Genesis 3.

In other words, at the first existence of this being in Eden, he is not a bad being (yet) where Adam&amp;Eve need not to be cautious of this being.

Since that is just a non-Christian personal opinion, that's why I would like to know if there is any Christian Church Denomination which think the same.



After I do some "deeper digging" in the internet, I found the below quotation from this site

Quote-1


  Archbishop Ussher, the great 17th-century Bible scholar, placed
  Satan’s fall on the tenth day of the first year, which is the Day of
  Atonement


Reading it directly (without reading the original Ussher's book), it seems Ussher has the same thinking with me which is before Genesis 3 event, the first existence of this being in Eden (together with Adam and Eve) is not in a fallen state.

So I search more, and found James Ussher "The Annals of the World" and below is his text 

Quote-2


  The Devil envied God's honour and man's obedience. He tempted the
  woman to sin by the serpent. By this he got the name and title of the
  old serpent


To me, the bold sentence is not easy because Ussher use a word "devil" where this word already implied in a negative sense, an evil being. This leads me to two option :

A. because he is A Devil, an evil being, a fallen state being (in the beginning of his first existence in Eden) that's why he envied God's honour and man's obedience

B. because (later on after his first existence in Eden) he envied God's honour and man's obedience , that's why he is called a devil, an evil being. 

To me, it seems Quote-1 choose the point-B.
In B, the "fit" paraphrased of Quote-2 is become like this 

Quote-3


  The being envied God's honour and man's obedience. He tempted the woman to sin by the serpent. By this he got the name and title of the
  old serpent and called a devil.


I still can not decide what Usher's meant in his sentences in Quote-2.
Anyway, my original question is still apply :).
The consensus of the first millennium Church Fathers was that the serpent of Genesis 3:1 (Masoretic נָחָשׁ - nā·ḥāš; Greek ὄφις - ophis) was a simple creature that was used as a tool by the devil.

John Chrysostom (c 349-407) wrote:


  Do not  regard the present serpent; do not regard how we flee it and feel repulsion towards it.  It was not such in the beginning.  The serpent was the friend of man and the closest of those who served him ... As a creature who enjoyed great closeness to man, the serpent seemed to the devil to be a convenient tool.1


Similar views are held by by Ephrem the Syrian2 (306-373) and John of Damascus3 (c 675-749).

All of the above are considered authoritative even today within the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church.  Their teachings carry various weight among many Protestants as well.

Note that Scripture itself attests that  the serpent was simply a beast of the field (or wild animal).

The above seems to have been the consensus (at least at one time) of Jewish interpreters as well.4

1. On the Creation of the World VI.2
2. Commentary on Genesis II.XV.1
3. Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith II.10
4. Oxford Jewish Study Bible (2nd ed.)