Adam and his wife died physically after eating the Forbidden Fruit. Genesis 2:17 is Literal.

[Subduction Zone]

No, but is says they will die on that day.

How do you resolve the contradiction of God's word not being truthful?

Realize that it is not "God's word"?

 

[Left Coast]

No, but is says they will die on that day.

How do you resolve the contradiction of God's word not being truthful?

Non-literalism =/= non-truthfulness.

You should know that: your view requires a whole bunch of non-literalism.

On the day they eat the fruit, Adam and Eve are driven from the garden. That's a death: a death to their entire way of life and seeing the world.

 

[Yokefellow]

On the day they eat the fruit, Adam and Eve are driven from the garden. That's a death: a death to their entire way of life and seeing the world.

So, what you are saying is that the phrase 'surely die' means to be driven from the Garden, correct?

 

[Left Coast]

So, what you are saying is that the phrase 'surely die' means to be driven from the Garden, correct?

I don't have a strong opinion about it. Some commentators have suggested it means they would obtain awareness of their mortality.

Either of those make vastly more sense than believing that they immediately keeled over and then were recreated without a word about it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Again, the topic is whether Genesis 2:17 has been interpreted incorrectly by the Church.

It depends. On what the interpretation might be.

 

[Yokefellow]

I don't have a strong opinion about it. Some commentators have suggested it means they would obtain awareness of their mortality.

Either of those make vastly more sense than believing that they immediately keeled over and then were recreated without a word about it.

The phrase 'surely die' is found twenty-two times in the Bible. The meaning/interpretation has a consistent pattern...

• Disobedience to God
• Physical death <- often imminent
• Allusion to going to Hell and the Lake of Fire

To suggest that we must alter one of the verses so that it 'makes sense' means that the verse is now in contradiction with the rest of the Bible.

It is the same issue with the word 'Day'. That word is used thousands of times and has a consistent meaning unless otherwise specified.

 

[Left Coast]

The phrase 'surely die' is found twenty-two times in the Bible. The meaning/interpretation has a consistent pattern...

• Disobedience to God
• Physical death <- often imminent
• Allusion to going to Hell and the Lake of Fire

And Adam does die. The text says he does. Just not the way you want it to say he did.

To suggest that we must alter one of the verses so that it 'makes sense' means that the verse is now in contradiction with the rest of the Bible.

Nah.

It is the same issue with the word 'Day'. That word is used thousands of times and has a consistent meaning unless otherwise specified.

That's gonna run you into even more of a problem. Right in Genesis, chapter 1's version of creation says it took six days. Genesis 2 says it took one.

 

[Yokefellow]

The text doesn't say anything about instantly dying and being recreated.

If Satan had one form one minute, then had a completely different form the next, how is that not a recreation?

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"

You tell me that the idea of Living Creatures being recreated in Genesis 3 is an absurd idea, yet there it is for all to see.

Satan was recreated; thus, your statement is false.

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't have a strong opinion about it. Some commentators have suggested it means they would obtain awareness of their mortality.

Either of those make vastly more sense than believing that they immediately keeled over and then were recreated without a word about it.

On the day they ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, the death sentence was passed, their bodies began to deteriorate and they -- eventually went back to the ground. If they had not done what God told them not to do they would not have died. Moreover there are seven days of creation. Six days had been completed. But not the SEVENTH DAY.

 

[Yokefellow]

And Adam does die. The text says he does. Just not the way you want it to say he did.

We already went over this. Your interpretation of Genesis 2:17 requires altering the word 'day' to mean 'a thousand years'.

My interpretation does not require any alteration of the text.

That's gonna run you into even more of a problem. Right in Genesis, chapter 1's version of creation says it took six days. Genesis 2 says it took one.

So, according to you, the word 'day' changes from 'one thousand years' in Genesis 2:17 to 'six days' in Genesis 2:4, correct?

How often must we change that word to suit the narrative?

Day is literal in this verse...

Genesis 2:4
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens"

It is referring to the Third Day. We know this because no plants or people existed yet...

Genesis 2:5
"And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."

What does God create on the Third Day?

Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

If we alter the word 'day' as you do, that makes God an even bigger liar than you made him already... lol.

 

[Left Coast]

If Satan had one form one minute, then had a completely different form the next, how is that not a recreation?

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"

You tell me that the idea of Living Creatures being recreated in Genesis 3 is an absurd idea, yet there it is for all to see.

Satan was recreated; thus, your statement is false.

The text in Genesis doesn't say anything about Satan. Another addition to the text!

 

[Left Coast]

On the day they ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, the death sentence was passed, their bodies began to deteriorate and they -- eventually went back to the ground. If they had not done what God told them not to do they would not have died.

That's a more natural reading of the text than the OP, for sure.

Moreover there are seven days of creation. Six days had been completed. But not the SEVENTH DAY.

On the 7th day God didn't do any creating. He rested.

 

[Yokefellow]

On the day they ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, the death sentence was passed, their bodies began to deteriorate and they -- eventually went back to the ground. If they had not done what God told them not to do they would not have died. Moreover there are seven days of creation. Six days had been completed. But not the SEVENTH DAY.

Hi @YoursTrue . Thank you for visiting and commenting.

So, what you are saying is that 'surely die' means 'eventually die', or 'begin to die', correct?

 

[Yokefellow]

The text in Genesis doesn't say anything about Satan. Another addition to the text!

You are dodging the question.

Meh, I am taking a break for tonight.

I appreciate you and everyone for taking time to post!

 

[YoursTrue]

Hi @YoursTrue . Thank you for visiting and commenting.

So, what you are saying is that 'surely die' means 'eventually die', or 'begin to die', correct?

We have to look at the "evidence." namely the Bible.
They could have kept living if they did not disobey God. He didn't just tell them not to eat from the tree but He told them what would happen if they did. I am pretty sure neither Adam nor Eve thought it would be OK for them to eat from the tree anyway, thinking God would shrug his shoulders and say, OK, don't worry if you do eat from that tree. Even Eve knew she was disobeying but was in a different category than Adam.
But when they ate from that tree they had the death penalty without release imposed. When God said they will surely die, it's different from a court telling a person he will get the death penalty. It could be appealed, but in Adam and Eve's case there was no appeal. Keep in mind, Yokefellow, that some may argue that the seventh day was a 24 hour period in which God "rested," as if He needs a breather. The term day, by the way, can be an extended period of time with a beginning and a closure. Such as in my grandfather's 'day.' Hope that helps to explain.
Thanks for discussion.
The seventh day is not said to have ended. The other six days did end.

 

[Ebionite]

that taking away and adding to the Word of God is of course a very big no-no, yet everyone does it with Genesis 2:17.

The Bible isn't the "Word of God". The word is something that is spoken and heard, not something that is written.

 

[YoursTrue]

That's a more natural reading of the text than the OP, for sure.



On the 7th day God didn't do any creating. He rested.

I'd like to look at this a little more perhaps with you and Yokefellow. Adam and Eve sinned on the 7th day. But that goes further and we can perhaps look at it later...

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Adam and his wife died *physically* after partaking of the Forbidden Fruit. Moreover, it was on that very day...

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."

• Day means Day, as in twenty-four hours or less.
• Surely Die means Surely Die, as in physical death.

As far as I know, I am the only person on the planet that believes the above verse.

Both Christians and Non-Christians alike will take away and add words to the verse to make it state something it does not.

Some examples include...

• Spiritual Death: Adam and his wife 'died Spiritually'.
• Begin to Age: The 'aging process' for Adam and his wife 'began ticking'.
• Day is a Thousand Years: Adam and his wife 'died within a thousand-year timeframe'.

Note that taking away and adding to the Word of God is of course a very big no-no, yet everyone does it with Genesis 2:17.

There is no need however, to alter the verse. Genesis 2:17 agrees with the entire Bible when taken literally.

In fact, it is the *only* way in which it does!

No, it isn’t….
“Yom”, the Hebrew word for “day”, can mean a period of time, an era marking delineation of a set

Notice that all the days of 1 thru 6 ended. Now God rested on the 7th day, right? When does Genesis say it ended? It doesn’t. And the Apostle Paul said @ Hebrews 4:4-11 that God’s rest day was still going on, in his day…. over 4,000 years later! Even to this day, it still hasn’t ended!

Plus, we are told that Adam died @ 930 years of age @ Genesis 5:5…

King James Bible
“And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.”

That’s a long day!

 

[exchemist]

You are dodging the question.

Meh, I am taking a break for tonight.

I appreciate you and everyone for taking time to post!

...he says, dodging the question.....

 

[shunyadragon]

Thanks @shunyadragon for checking out the thread.

Because this subforum is called "Scriptural Debates/Biblical Debates", I was under the impression that this subforum was for 'Scripture vs. Scripture' debates, not 'Scripture vs. Myth' or whatever.

It is very much 'right on' that the problem of myth in ancient religions falsely considered factual history is very much a part of the debate here.

My hope was to be able to compare verses with other verses in the Bible in order to prove or disprove whether Genesis 2:17 could be interpreted literally within the boundaries/confines of the Christian Bible.

I am not sure where the Scripture vs. Scripture Debate forum is. Does such a forum exist? The 'DIR' forums have a 'no debate' policy.

This is a Biblical Debate section of this forum.

The bottom line is this...

Whether the Christian Bible is 'complete fiction', has 'some Truth', is 'poetry', is a 'Myth', etc. has nothing to do with understanding what the Book is teaching overall from a Church and hermeneutics perspective.

It has everything to do with the issues here. Nothing is stated as to whether it is 'complete fiction' though it very well be mostly fiction as far as the Pentateuch is concerned.

@AdamjEdgar posted some great verses and interpretation and is an example of the kind of debate I am hoping to have.

. . . and I am challenging your overreach of the interpretations of scripture with very little or no basis in fact, and no basis whatsoever in science.