Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 05:50 AM
 
190 posts, read 61,786 times
Reputation: 17

Advertisements

One of the biggest lies that is told by the Church is that Genesis 2:17 is 'not literal'...

Genesis 2:17
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."


They will either change the word 'day', or they will change the phrase 'surely die' to mean something they do not (e.g., day = thousand years, spiritual death, began to die, etc.).

According to Scholars who understand how to properly translate and interpret the text, both 'day' and 'surely die' are to be understood as being literal.

Many resources may be found on the internet that go into great detail on this topic.

Example 1:

Finally, to interpret Genesis 2:17 as announcing natural consequences instead of a juridical penalty ignores the overwhelming biblical evidence of how authors used the phrase in question throughout the Old Testament. As such, the natural consequences interpretation seems to establish human arbiters as higher authorities than the text to determine its truthfulness and relevance. Scripture no longer interprets Scripture.

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/arc...-you-shall-die

Example 2:

Here is another Bible Scholar that also agrees that 'day' and 'surely die' are literal...





Note that Dan McClellan in the above videos believes that God lied.

Although I agree with the above research that Genesis 2:17 is literal, I do not believe God lied.

So, why do so many Christians lie and claim that Genesis 2:17 is not literal? Is there an agenda here? Are they just ignorant?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 07:38 AM
 
45,719 posts, read 27,340,900 times
Reputation: 23977
They did die that day... spiritually separated from the source of life, which is God. Physical death (separation of soul & spirit from the body) was an added penalty.

A branch on a tree is alive until it is cut away from the tree. It died at that point. The leaves remain green and it looks alive on day 1, day 2, day 3... but eventually the fact that it's dead will show as leaves get brown and brittle.

Death = separation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:51 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
33,349 posts, read 26,570,613 times
Reputation: 16448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Base12 View Post
One of the biggest lies that is told by the Church is that Genesis 2:17 is 'not literal'...

Genesis 2:17
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."


They will either change the word 'day', or they will change the phrase 'surely die' to mean something they do not (e.g., day = thousand years, spiritual death, began to die, etc.).

According to Scholars who understand how to properly translate and interpret the text, both 'day' and 'surely die' are to be understood as being literal.

Many resources may be found on the internet that go into great detail on this topic.

Example 1:

Finally, to interpret Genesis 2:17 as announcing natural consequences instead of a juridical penalty ignores the overwhelming biblical evidence of how authors used the phrase in question throughout the Old Testament. As such, the natural consequences interpretation seems to establish human arbiters as higher authorities than the text to determine its truthfulness and relevance. Scripture no longer interprets Scripture.

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/arc...-you-shall-die

Example 2:

Here is another Bible Scholar that also agrees that 'day' and 'surely die' are literal...





Note that Dan McClellan in the above videos believes that God lied.

Although I agree with the above research that Genesis 2:17 is literal, I do not believe God lied.

So, why do so many Christians lie and claim that Genesis 2:17 is not literal? Is there an agenda here? Are they just ignorant?
First of all, no one is lying. People, including scholars, have different opinions and different interpretations about what the Bible says about some thing. Having a different interpretation is not lying.

Secondly, no part of either of the two Genesis creation stories is literal. The whole creation narratives are simply Hebrew adaptations of earlier ancient Near East creation stories and were intended as polemics against those earlier ANE creation events in order to give the Hebrew God Yahweh the credit for creation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:44 AM
 
190 posts, read 61,786 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
They did die that day... spiritually separated from the source of life, which is God. Physical death (separation of soul & spirit from the body) was an added penalty.
Thanks for visiting and commenting.

Unfortunately, your interpretation does not agree with the facts. Surely die means physical death. Day means day. The Hebrew says what it says and cannot be changed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Death = separation
That is just made-up dogma. That point is addressed in the videos.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:00 AM
 
190 posts, read 61,786 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way View Post
First of all, no one is lying.
Of course they are. That has already been proven.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way View Post
People, including scholars, have different opinions and different interpretations about what the Bible says about some thing. Having a different interpretation is not lying.
If the interpretation is easily proven to be false, it is a lie. Moreover, corrections should be made from that point forward with regards to sermons, teaching materials, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way View Post
Secondly, no part of either of the two Genesis creation stories is literal.
The issue is whether Genesis 2:17 speaks of a physical death or a spiritual death, and whether it speaks of a twenty-four hour or less period of time or a thousand years.

This thread is not about whether the creation stories themselves are literal or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way View Post
The whole creation narratives are simply Hebrew adaptations of earlier ancient Near East creation stories and were intended as polemics against those earlier ANE creation events in order to give the Hebrew God Yahweh the credit for creation.
Again, that has nothing to do with the OP. Besides attempting to derail the thread with your usual 'Genesis is a myth' propaganda, you have proven nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:36 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
33,349 posts, read 26,570,613 times
Reputation: 16448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Base12 View Post
Of course they are. That has already been proven.
No one is lying. A lie is a deliberate attempt to convey something that a person knows is not true.


Quote:
If the interpretation is easily proven to be false, it is a lie. Moreover, corrections should be made from that point forward with regards to sermons, teaching materials, etc.
No, if something is proven to be false concerning something in the Bible, it just means that the interpretation was wrong. It doesn't mean that someone was purposely stating something they knew to be wrong.

Quote:
The issue is whether Genesis 2:17 speaks of a physical death or a spiritual death, and whether it speaks of a twenty-four hour or less period of time or a thousand years.

This thread is not about whether the creation stories themselves are literal or not.
And yet, since the creation stories are not literal, then in reality, whether Genesis 2:17 speaks of a physical or a spiritual death is mute as it has no basis in reality.


Quote:
Again, that has nothing to do with the OP. Besides attempting to derail the thread with your usual 'Genesis is a myth' propaganda, you have proven nothing.
No derail is intended. And it's not propaganda. That the creation stories are not literal, that they are not historically true, has been proven over and over again by science as well as by ANE studies.

People, including scholars have different opinions about Genesis 2:17 because they are trying to make sense of what the passage is saying. They are not purposely 'lying.' They are not trying to deceive anyone. Whether the passage is thought to be referring to a 24 hour day or to a longer period, and whether the reference to death is thought to be physical or spiritual is simply a matter of interpretation based on theological presuppositions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:31 AM
 
63,966 posts, read 40,253,710 times
Reputation: 7891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way View Post
No one is lying. A lie is a deliberate attempt to convey something that a person knows is not true.

No, if something is proven to be false concerning something in the Bible, it just means that the interpretation was wrong. It doesn't mean that someone was purposely stating something they knew to be wrong.

And yet, since the creation stories are not literal, then in reality, whether Genesis 2:17 speaks of a physical or a spiritual death is mute as it has no basis in reality.

No derail is intended. And it's not propaganda. That the creation stories are not literal, that they are not historically true, has been proven over and over again by science as well as by ANE studies.

People, including scholars have different opinions about Genesis 2:17 because they are trying to make sense of what the passage is saying. They are not purposely 'lying.' They are not trying to deceive anyone. Whether the passage is thought to be referring to a 24 hour day or to a longer period, and whether the reference to death is thought to be physical or spiritual is simply a matter of interpretation based on theological presuppositions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:35 PM
 
45,719 posts, read 27,340,900 times
Reputation: 23977
Quote:
Originally Posted by Base12 View Post
Thanks for visiting and commenting.

Unfortunately, your interpretation does not agree with the facts. Surely die means physical death. Day means day. The Hebrew says what it says and cannot be changed.



That is just made-up dogma. That point is addressed in the videos.
You say no... I say yes... In the end neither opinion matters.


If die means physical death as you say... what is Jesus referring to below? Seems like more than one death is in play.
Matthew 10:28 - Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:16 PM
 
Location: Middle America
11,160 posts, read 7,227,160 times
Reputation: 17065
The die / dying / death part is where we went from sinless and immortal, to sinful and mortal. Mortal means that we will all surely die, just as those old Judaic writings mentioned.

If you think you or anyone else can cheat death, then speak up. We could all use some entertainment today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:19 PM
 
Location: New Zealand
11,916 posts, read 3,744,938 times
Reputation: 1133
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
You say no... I say yes... In the end neither opinion matters.


If die means physical death as you say... what is Jesus referring to below? Seems like more than one death is in play.
Matthew 10:28 - Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Or this

Luk 9:59**And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
Luk 9:60**Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

I’m of the opinion that it is the religious system and organisational types which are being referred to as spiritually ‘dead’ in Adam, it is where the sleeping in Christ are

All of Ephesians is written to ‘the church’ about their relationships with each other

Eph 5:10**Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
Eph 5:11**And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Eph 5:12**For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.
Eph 5:13**But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.
Eph 5:14**Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
Eph 5:15**See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,

Last edited by Meerkat2; Yesterday at 01:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top