Spiritual or Physical Death

[Marilyn C]

16 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Actually, if you bothered reading what I am saying, I have taken pains, over several posts, to point to the fact that there is no other way to receive eternal life except through Christ.  I have taken great pains to point out that Tree of Life did not give eternal life.   You are either not reading my posts, or you are being deliberately dishonest and misrepresenting what I am saying.

Eternal life is the very life of God in us.  More to the point, Jesus is eternal life.  I thought my last post made that clear.

 

I am not really concerned about that.  What concerns me is this sloppy theology that tries to incorrectly argue that the tree of life in Genesis 3 is anything but a real tree.

Hi Shiloh,

I do read what you say, however you are not consistent. You are trying to make out that the tree of life`s life is different from Christ`s life. Christ is the source of all life and NO tree gives life, however you may twist it. Christ was Adam`s source of life as figured by the tree with its fruit giving life, which Adam was able to freely partake of as he walked in the garden in the cool of the day with God, receiving of God`s life continually.

And evading my second question just shows that you don`t want to equate the tree of life in the garden with the tree of life in the New Jerusalem, for that would show up your mistake, bro. Whether in the garden, or in time (post sin), or in the future New Heavens and New Earth, the ONLY source of life is from the Lord Himself, for eternal life is His actual character that is - holy, righteous, pure, faithful, humble, compassionate, serving, etc etc. These are the qualities of eternal life which we all need, to live, live with the right character in communities together, in peace and harmony.

Marilyn.

[Guest shiloh357]

2 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,I do read what you say, however you are not consistent. You are trying to make out that the tree of life`s life is different from Christ`s life.

I am perfectly consistent.  I am saying that the tree of life in the Garden of Eden did not produce eternal life.  So yes, that is different than Christ's life.   The tree of life  would have left Adam in a cursed state and unable to have access to Christ's life.   They could not be more different. 

Quote

Christ is the source of all life and NO tree gives life, however you may twist it.

The Tree of Life would have given Adam immortality in his fallen state.

Quote

Christ was Adam`s source of life as figured by the tree with its fruit giving life, which Adam was able to freely partake of as he walked in the garden in the cool of the day with God, receiving of God`s life continually.

God was the source of Adam's life.   The Tree of Life is not a figure of Christ because the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden would have been a curse and an impediment to eternal life for mankind.  The Tree of Life would have kept man from Christ, so it cannot also be a picture of Christ.

If the Tree of Life were a picture of Christ, then it makes no sense why God would have prevented Adam from partaking of that life offered by the Tree.  That's where your theological approach pretty much collapses under its own weight.   

You are trying to manufacture a purpose for the Tree of Life that the Bible nowhere establishes.   You are assigning values to the Tree of Life that are entirely made up out of whole cloth and have no foundation in a clear statement from, or a competent exegesis of, Scripture.

Quote

And evading my second question just shows that you don`t want to equate the tree of life in the garden with the tree of life in the New Jerusalem, for that would show up your mistake, bro.

No, it doesn't expose any mistake of mine, because I have not made any mistakes in this thread.   The reason I am not concerned about it, is because there is no connection between the Tree of Life in Genesis and the Tree of Life in Revelation.   I have seen first hand, from past experience, that your erroneous theology thrives on manufacturing connections that don't exist between passages of Scripture and trying to force the Bible to say what you need it to say, and I am simply not going to have this debate on your terms.   

I will say that either the Tree of Life in Genesis, nor the Tree of Life in Revelation are EVER presented as pictures of Jesus and neither one gives eternal life.

Quote

Whether in the garden, or in time (post sin), or in the future New Heavens and New Earth, the ONLY source of life is from the Lord Himself, for eternal life is His actual character that is - holy, righteous, pure, faithful, humble, compassionate, serving, etc etc. These are the qualities of eternal life which we all need, to live, live with the right character in communities together, in peace and harmony.

And none  of that has anything to do with the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden.

[Marilyn C]

2 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

I am perfectly consistent.  I am saying that the tree of life in the Garden of Eden did not produce eternal life.  So yes, that is different than Christ's life.   The tree of life  would have left Adam in a cursed state and unable to have access to Christ's life.   They could not be more different. 

The Tree of Life would have given Adam immortality in his fallen state.

God was the source of Adam's life.   The Tree of Life is not a figure of Christ because the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden would have been a curse and an impediment to eternal life for mankind.  The Tree of Life would have kept man from Christ, so it cannot also be a picture of Christ.

If the Tree of Life were a picture of Christ, then it makes no sense why God would have prevented Adam from partaking of that life offered by the Tree.  That's where your theological approach pretty much collapses under its own weight.   

 

Hi Shiloh,

Now the tree of life was in the garden before Adam sinned -

`And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food.

The tree of life was ALSO in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. ` (Gen. 2: 9)

So we see that the tree of life is mentioned separate from the other trees and was in the garden with Adam & Eve prior to sin. They were allowed to eat of every tree except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Thus God desired Adam & Eve to be immortal, if as you are saying, if they ate it they would be immortal. That makes no sense Shiloh.

Because the tree is written separately we see that it is different. Then as we read more of God`s word we realise that it is the Lord who gives life and none other - no animal, mineral or vegetable, or tree!

God protected Adam & Eve from partaking of the tree of life, of His own life for it`s no good to have Christ`s life on top of a sinful heart. The heart must first be cleansed and we know that is ONLY through the precious blood of Jesus. Then and only then can we partake of Christ`s divine life, as Peter tells us. (2 Peter 1: 4)

Marilyn

[Guest shiloh357]

1 hour ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,

Now the tree of life was in the garden before Adam sinned -

`And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food.

The tree of life was ALSO in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. ` (Gen. 2: 9)

So we see that the tree of life is mentioned separate from the other trees and was in the garden with Adam & Eve prior to sin. They were allowed to eat of every tree except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Thus God desired Adam & Eve to be immortal, if as you are saying, if they ate it they would be immortal. That makes no sense Shiloh.

Which is why I maintain that we don't know what the purpose of tree was prior to the fall of man.   It didn't provide immortal life to people who could not die.   So there was a different purpose for it prior to the fall.    All we know is how it would effect Adam AFTER the fall.

Quote

Because the tree is written separately we see that it is different. Then as we read more of God`s word we realise that it is the Lord who gives life and none other - no animal, mineral or vegetable, or tree!

That means the tree didn't give eternal life and is thus, not a picture of Christ, as eating from the tree in his fallen state would have actually doomed Adam to be cursed for eternity.

Quote

God protected Adam & Eve from partaking of the tree of life, of His own life for it`s no good to have Christ`s life on top of a sinful heart.

No, God protected Adam and Eve from eating from the tree in their fallen state because the tree would have mankind from every having the life of Christ.   The tree didn't produce the life of Christ.   It produced an immortality that would have kept mankind from dying and thus make it impossible for the humanity of Christ to die on the cross, which would make atonement impossible.

Quote

The heart must first be cleansed and we know that is ONLY through the precious blood of Jesus. Then and only then can we partake of Christ`s divine life, as Peter tells us. (2 Peter 1: 4)

Which has nothing to do with the tree of life in the Garden of Eden.

[n2thelight]

Oh,but they did die on that 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."

"In the day that thou eatest" gives us the key to understand man's physical span of life. For Peter gives us the key to this understanding in II Peter 3:8; "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." No man has ever exceeded the thousand year period, not even "Methuselah" who lived "nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died." [Genesis 5:27]

That's why nobody ever lived pass 1000 years...

Edited September 13, 2017 by n2thelight

[n2thelight]

 

Mark 8:24 "And he looked up, and "I see men as trees, walking."

 The lesson here deals with trees, the trees that go way back to the garden of Eden. The tree of life, who is Christ, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, who is Satan. Can you see the fig tree and the men filling the roles of the parable of the fig tree? The trees were not fuzzy, but they were clear, Jesus was teaching a lesson, and the lesson deals with all the lessons whereby people are used as trees.

Back in Ezekiel 31 God used trees to explain exactly what would take place in the last generation. Satan the Assyrian presented himself to be the mighty cedar of Lebanon, higher than all the other boughs or branches, and the cedars of the garden of God, he tried to hide his identity. All of the other trees admired this mighty cedar, but in the end this mighty cedar will be cut down. It was talking about our generation, and the trees of this lesson are people. Jesus is asking us, do you see the lesson that I am trying to present to you, do you understand?

This is how you gain the eyes to see, when you look at the types that are presented to you. Jesus Christ used symbols and types to teach us and give us more than He would say in Words, and those with eyes to see with understanding will look beyond for the deeper meanings.

[Running Gator]

3 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,

Now the tree of life was in the garden before Adam sinned -

`And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food.

The tree of life was ALSO in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. ` (Gen. 2: 9)

So we see that the tree of life is mentioned separate from the other trees and was in the garden with Adam & Eve prior to sin. They were allowed to eat of every tree except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Thus God desired Adam & Eve to be immortal, if as you are saying, if they ate it they would be immortal. That makes no sense Shiloh.

Because the tree is written separately we see that it is different. Then as we read more of God`s word we realise that it is the Lord who gives life and none other - no animal, mineral or vegetable, or tree!

God protected Adam & Eve from partaking of the tree of life, of His own life for it`s no good to have Christ`s life on top of a sinful heart. The heart must first be cleansed and we know that is ONLY through the precious blood of Jesus. Then and only then can we partake of Christ`s divine life, as Peter tells us. (2 Peter 1: 4)

Marilyn

I agree with Shiloh that there is a difference between immortal and eternal.    In my view immortal deals with our physical bodies and eternal deals with our souls.  These bodies that our souls now inhabit are not going into eternity with us, all of these bodies will die a physical death, which is also why I say that Jesus was not here to save us from physical death. 

I do though believe the Tree of Life was a real and tangible thing, though I do disagree with the notion that the purpose of the tree some how changed after the fall, the Bible does not tell us that and frankly what other purpose would the "Tree of Life" have if not to impart life. 

[Guest shiloh357]

4 hours ago, n2thelight said:

 

Mark 8:24 "And he looked up, and "I see men as trees, walking."

 The lesson here deals with trees, the trees that go way back to the garden of Eden. The tree of life, who is Christ, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, who is Satan. Can you see the fig tree and the men filling the roles of the parable of the fig tree? The trees were not fuzzy, but they were clear, Jesus was teaching a lesson, and the lesson deals with all the lessons whereby people are used as trees.

Back in Ezekiel 31 God used trees to explain exactly what would take place in the last generation. Satan the Assyrian presented himself to be the mighty cedar of Lebanon, higher than all the other boughs or branches, and the cedars of the garden of God, he tried to hide his identity. All of the other trees admired this mighty cedar, but in the end this mighty cedar will be cut down. It was talking about our generation, and the trees of this lesson are people. Jesus is asking us, do you see the lesson that I am trying to present to you, do you understand?

This is how you gain the eyes to see, when you look at the types that are presented to you. Jesus Christ used symbols and types to teach us and give us more than He would say in Words, and those with eyes to see with understanding will look beyond for the deeper meanings.

This is complete nonsense. 

The tree of life was not and is not Jesus.   This is false teaching.

[n2thelight]

3 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

This is complete nonsense. 

The tree of life was not and is not Jesus.   This is false teaching.

Thanks 

[Marilyn C]

14 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

Which is why I maintain that we don't know what the purpose of tree was prior to the fall of man.   It didn't provide immortal life to people who could not die.   So there was a different purpose for it prior to the fall.    All we know is how it would effect Adam AFTER the fall.

 

Hi Shiloh,

Now God`s word definitely tells us what the tree of life stood for - to `live for ever.` (Gen. 3: 22) 

You have quite a few misunderstanding there bro, so let`s look at the truths of God`s word -

1. Adam & Eve were made from the dust of the earth and thus were not immortal.

2. They were able to eat from all the trees, (which also were from the ground) including the tree of life, (except the tree of knowledge...) which are mentioned separately from those of the ground.

 

So your theory of the tree of life being a tree does not hold out on many points.

1. It was not of the ground.

2. As Adam & Eve could eat it before the fall, then God would be letting them become immortal and then exposing them to sin and living like that for ever. That is absurd. 

 

Your theory is trying to stand on `what God`s word does not say,` and that is an untruth.

You are also trying on the other hand to say `you believe` God`s word, when actually you are putting blinkers on and not relating this in Genesis to ALL of God`s word. That is partiality.

And finally you, dear bro, have stepped into mysticism. I will post on that later, as there is enough for you here.

 

Marilyn.