Why Do Christians Lie About What God Said in Genesis 2:17?

Qubit said:

Where again is the phrase 'died spiritually' in Genesis 2:17?

Click to expand...

In adam all die

even so in christ shall all be made alive

tell me what types of death these are?

God said Adam would die in that moment,

he either died. or God lied..

Qubit said:

Thanks, I am not a big fan of many of Michael Heiser's "Ancient Near-Eastern (ANE) Myth" views. He gets too many things wrong.

Click to expand...

I actually didn't learn about it originally from Michael Heiser. I first read William Lane Craig's In Quest of the Historical Adam: A Biblical and Scientific Exploration. However, I didn't find much fault in Craig's reasoning and categorization of it. Maybe you could point it out to me. I'll watch the video within this week

Qubit said:

They physically died, and God resurrected them.

Click to expand...

What do you think is more likely, that the word 'day' is to be interpreted as 'epoch' or 'era'?

Or that it's an exact literal translation and God just requires you to ADD to Scripture so it will make sense?

Seriously, this is the most horrible thing I have ever read, for real. It's not controversial it's outright heretical.

Eternally Grateful said:

he either died. or God lied..

Click to expand...

That's a statement that sounds like something Satan said to Eve in the garden...

Yet after bringing death into the world we are supposed to just believe Satan now?

Lol....

It is rather amusing that the first lesson of the Bible is not to be an exact literalist (like Satan) yet people still insist.

Qubit said:

This is a big problem that Christians sweep under the rug. As usual, the answer is "No, God did not lie, we just need to change the words of the Bible to make it say what we want".

Click to expand...

It's not a problem at all.
Adam and Eve sinned. They had to account for their actions, were punished and driven out of the garden. The relationship between God and mankind was broken, sin entered the world. From then onwards people - Cain, Abel, Noah, Job etc - had to offer sacrifices to approach God.

It's the Gospel - created in God's image, mankind disobeyed him, the relationship was broken. God loved us so much that he sent Jesus who reconciled us to him.

Qubit said:

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."

Your Cognitive Dissonance is preventing you from seeing what is clearly there.

Click to expand...

I know what is there; I also know what is not there.
And "Adam and Eve ate the fruit, died, were resurrected, punished and escorted from the garden", is not there.

Qubit said:

Where is the phrase 'began to die'? No Bible I know of says that in Genesis 2:17.

See? I can play the same game as you, except I win because God is very clear about what he said would happen.

Click to expand...

Yes - what happened was that they became spiritually separated from God, and death entered the world; they had a physical life span.

Qubit said:

Nope. It is a translation, not an interpretation. Big difference. As for interpretation, Scripture is the one interpreting as I have posted many times already.

Click to expand...

Adam and Eve disobeyed God, sin entered the world. People who lived without God, ignored or disobeyed him, were sinners; dead in their sins.
Many verses of the Bible teach that - the flood was sent because people's sin was so great. Job offered sacrifices on behalf of his children in case they had sinned. Moses gave the Israelites a whole list of sacrifices they had to offer depending on the nature of the sin. Aaron, and others, were punished for setting up, and worshipping, the golden calf. The Israelites sinned again and again and were unable to keep God's law. Jesus said that his blood was being poured out for the sin of the world. Paul said that Jesus reconciled us to God, that in Adam we all die and in Christ we are made alive. Jesus said that he had come to have life in its fulness, that whoever believed in him would have eternal life, and that whoever believed in him would never die. John said that Jesus came to bring eternal life, and that whoever did not receive the Son did not have eternal life.

That is the Bible interpreting, and agreeing with, the teaching that Adam and Eve sinned against God and were expelled from the garden before they could eat from the tree of life.

Nowhere does the Bible agree with the statement that Adam and Eve physically died, were resurrected and went on to have Cain, Avel and Seth.

Qubit said:

Scripture NEVER interprets 'surely die' as anything other than physical death. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate otherwise.

Click to expand...

You are claiming that Adam and Eve's physical death was immediate, or almost, leading to immediate resurrection so they could carry on with the rest of their lives - when neither the text, nor the rest of the Bible, say that.
If you want to persuade anyone to believe something which isn't written, it is up to you to do so.

Qubit said:

Strawman. That sentence is not there, but so what?

Click to expand...

So when I make a statement your response is "show me the verse that says ...."
When you make a statement and I ask for the Scripture verse, your response is, "it's not there; so what?"
Right.

Qubit said:

The text describes Adam, the Woman and the Serpent all receiving completely different bodies with new biology, DNA, physiology, etc.

Click to expand...

It does nothing of the kind. Scripture doesn't mention DNA, Biology etc.

All it says is that from then onwards, the snake would crawl on its belly. That doesn't mean it had a new body.

Qubit said:

The Bible is very clear that the Serpent went from one form to another. Hello? That is called reincarnation. You are blind to the obvious.

Click to expand...

Reincarnation is when a person - or maybe animal - dies and returns in another body.
Re = again; incarnation = being born in the flesh. Christ's incarnation was when the Word became flesh John 1:14.
There is nothing in the text which says that Adam, Eve and the serpent physically died and returned in another form.

Qubit said:

So, according to you, whether a piece of information is factual or not depends on what church a person goes to or does not go to?

Click to expand...

No, I said that the Mormons are a cult. They are not a part of mainstream Christianity; they do not accept the Trinity. They also have their own sacred book which they claim is just as important as the Bible, if not more so.

Qubit said:

Thus: 1+1=2 is FALSE because a Mormon said it?

Click to expand...

You don't like it if you think I am putting words in your mouth or misrepresenting you - so please don't do it to me.

I asked "is it wise to believe the teachings of one who is so active in the Mormon church?" and pointed out that the Mormons are a cult.
I did NOT say that everything that a Mormon says is automatically false because they are Mormon.

Qubit said:

There you go with your ad hominems again.

Click to expand...

How is it an "ad hominem" to say that someone is a Mormon when there are several websites - including a Mormon one - which confirm it?

Qubit said:

What does Hebrews 9:27 have to do with Reincarnation?

Click to expand...

It says, "it is appointed for man to die ONCE."
Reincarnation, as I have said, is when someone dies and returns to life in a different body.

Qubit said:

I never said God did. That is your false belief that God torments the disobedient for infinity.

Click to expand...

You asked "would you rather God burn her for infinity?" post #30.
"Burn for infinity" was not in any of my posts - except when I was quoting you - nor do I believe it.

Qubit said:

I believe all will be saved in the end

Click to expand...

That is universalism, an unorthodox teaching - see the statement of purpose for this forum.

Qubit said:

Nope. The Hindus do not own exclusive rights to that word or concept.

Click to expand...

Never said they did.
Reincarnation is the belief that a person has many incarnations - births, or lives. If they are poor, disabled or have a lowly job it is because they did something bad or were unpleasant people in a former life. The belief, I think, is that a person can be reincarnated as many times as is necessary for them to achieve perfection - "the state of Nirvana."

Qubit said:

Let us use common sense. The phrase 'Born Again' is literally reincarnation!

Click to expand...

No, it's not.

Reincarnation is when a person physically dies and is born into a different body. That's literally what the word means - incarnation means taking on, or becoming flesh. We celebrate Jesus' incarnation, John 1:14, each Christmas.
"Born again" refers to being born of the Spirit, John 3:3.
We were separated from God because of sin - Paul said that we were dead in our sins. Through Jesus we can be reconciled to God and be given new life, 2 Corinthians 5:17, or eternal life, John 3:16, John 3:36, John 6:29, John 6:40, John 6:53.

I was born - incarnated - years ago. I became a Christian; received Jesus and was 0born again, several years later.
I did not get a new body at the time. Neither did anyone else who has ever been born again.

Qubit said:

Reincarnation, also known as rebirth or transmigration, is the philosophical or religious concept that the non-physical essence of a living being begins a new life in a different physical form or body after biological death.

Click to expand...

Read it again - a new, physical body after death.

I have never physically died.
I was born, grew bigger and older and am still here. I have photos of every stage of my physical life; as I suspect we all do. When I was born again; born of the Spirit, John 3:3, I did not get a new physical body.
Nicodemus himself seemed to believe this was what would happen when he asked "how can someone be born when they are old? Surely they cannot enter into their mother's womb a second time to be born?"
Jesus replied, "Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." John 3:6.

Qubit said:

The Bible teaches we are to become Born Again, you teach that we are not. You are teaching a lie, plain and simple.

Click to expand...

No, I am not; we DO need to be born again.
I am rejecting your idea that being born of the Spirit and literally receiving a new physical body after death (reincarnation) are the same thing.

Qubit said:

Please do not bear false witness against me.

Click to expand...

I wasn't. I was stating a fact.
Being born again, of the Spirit, John 3:6, is not the same as reincarnation; when a person physically dies and is born in another body. It doesn't matter what Wikipedia says. Reincarnation is not a Christian belief; regeneration (being born of the Spirit) is.

Yet you have borne false witness against me when you said that I believe in someone "burning forever" and that I am teaching a lie.

Qubit said:

So, Jesus was back in the same mortal body again? How and when did he die for a second time?

Click to expand...

He didn't die for a second time.

Qubit said:

Hi @HTacianas . Thanks for the list. I believe there is a third option we can add.

3. They physically died, and God resurrected them.

Obviously, the view is controversial, so I do not expect many to agree.

Click to expand...

Interesting so did it take awhile for them to die after they realized they were naked an sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves?

Hazelelponi said:

That's a statement that sounds like something Satan said to Eve in the garden...

Yet after bringing death into the world we are supposed to just believe Satan now?

Lol....

It is rather amusing that the first lesson of the Bible is not to be an exact literalist (like Satan) yet people still insist.

Click to expand...

lol

God is a literalist

He said you will die

Adam died.. We know he died by how he acted after his sin.. His knowledge of God was lost. because he was dead. seperated. and had to be restored.

God even showed him how. By covering him with a dead animal.

Qubit said:

One of the biggest lies that is told by many Christians 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.

Dying You Shall Die: The meaning of Genesis 2:17

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?

Click to expand...

To be honest this idea is where I believe the "day is 1000 years" equivalence came from, because God said in the day, and then Adam died within 1000 years.
"the day of the Lord" is another common phrase in the bible and in Revelation 20, John writes about a 1000 year period that is nowhere else in scripture. I believe John was using the day = 1000 years idea here as well.

Jamdoc said:

To be honest this idea is where I believe the "day is 1000 years" equivalence came from,

Click to expand...

Except that Peter says that a day is LIKE 1,000 years and 1,000 years LIKE a day, 2 Peter 3:8.

Peter is not giving a comment about the meaning of time, or of various words in Scripture. He is talking about the day of the Lord and that scoffers were/are saying "well when's he coming then?" His comment is that what may seem, to us, to be a long time is, for the Lord, only a day - and vice versa.
God is outside time.

(FWIW I believe that heaven is outside time too. Someone in heaven could see their friend/colleague/partner arrive only a short while after them - when, in earthly time, they died 40 years apart. That's just my view.)

Strong in Him said:

Except that Peter says that a day is LIKE 1,000 years and 1,000 years LIKE a day, 2 Peter 3:8.

Peter is not giving a comment about the meaning of time, or of various words in Scripture. He is talking about the day of the Lord and that scoffers were/are saying "well when's he coming then?" His comment is that what may seem, to us, to be a long time is, for the Lord, only a day - and vice versa.
God is outside time.

(FWIW I believe that heaven is outside time too. Someone in heaven could see their friend/colleague/partner arrive only a short while after them - when, in earthly time, they died 40 years apart. That's just my view.)

Click to expand...

right it's not meant to be an exact equivalence, but more just.. the Lord doesn't consider time by the same way we do, we think it's a long time to the Lord it's like, 1 day.

But that concept I believe comes from Adam's lifespan.

Clare73 said:

Is that not what happened?

Dying (on the day they ate of it, they died spiritually; i.e., lost eternal life), you shall die (they later died physically).

Click to expand...

Or a day is as 1,000 years

Ge 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Jamdoc said:

But that concept I believe comes from Adam's lifespan.

Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of it like that. I don't know that I agree, but it's interesting.
And if we do consider "day" to be a period of time - maybe 1,000 years, maybe more - it makes sense.

Strong in Him said:

I hadn't thought of it like that. I don't know that I agree, but it's interesting.
And if we do consider "day" to be a period of time - maybe 1,000 years, maybe more - it makes sense.

Click to expand...

I meditated on it a lot recently like Revelation 20.. where does this 1000 years come from.. and it hit me, the Day of the Lord. One day is with the Lord as a thousand years. That's what John must have gotten the 1000 year period from, all those references to the Day of the Lord and "that day" and people assume 24 hours.. but.. John says.. not 24 hours.

Lie is a divisive accusation that falls of deaf ears, I pray. I am taught by men who study Paleo-Hebrew that there are words for what we term day as well a day age and that in fact your assertion is incorrect on all points. It might be interesting to hear why you come hear screaming about this.

2PhiloVoid said:

I don't believe Adam and Eve ever even existed

Click to expand...

We have DNA evidence to show they were real people and they really existed. How much more evidence do you need?

Diamond7 said:

We have DNA evidence to show they were real people and they really existed. How much more evidence do you need?

Click to expand...

"WE" do????????????????????????????????????????

I'm sorry my good chap, but scientifically, I can't equate a Mitochondrial Eve with the Biblical Eve. Let's not talk about this as if these two separate concepts can be equated with each other. They're definitely not the same concept. Not by a long shot.

Furthermore, we DON'T know either that the biblical Adam and Ever were "separate" creations from some other line of homo-sapiens, and we don't know that the first three chapters of Genesis somehow implies this.

2PhiloVoid said:

I'm sorry my good chap, but scientifically, I can't equate a Mitochondrial Eve with the Biblical Eve

Click to expand...

Science - time magazine Eve and the Bible Eve are two different people. We read about the Science "Eve" when God created male and female on day six. This was around 250 million years ago when the world was destroyed at Pangea. The reptiles died off and the primates came into being. Many many books could be and have been written about all of this. In the book the seven daughters of Eve, Eve in the Bible was one of those seven Eve's in the book (Jasmine). Easy to remember if we think J means "Jewish".

1. Xenia: Corresponds to Haplogroup X.
2. Helena: Corresponds to Haplogroup H.
3. Velda: Corresponds to Haplogroup V, found with particularly high concentrations in the people of Cantabria (15%) of northern Iberia and especially in the Sami people of northern Scandinavia.
4. Tara: Corresponds to Haplogroup T.
5. Katrine: Corresponds to Haplogroup K.
6. Jasmine: Corresponds to Haplogroup J.