Four questions for YECs - (and a little history of creationism vs evolution)

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

FreeGrace said: 

But it can easily be argued that there were 2 deaths "on that day".

No, that would be an addition to God's word.

Research the internet regarding Gen 2:17.  In the Hebrew, it says "dying, thou shalt die".  There is no "addition" to God's word.  There is recognition of His Word.

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

   I get that if you spend a great deal of word juggling and add a few unscriptural assumptions, you can get to that conclusion.   Why not just accept it God's way, without all that extraneous pilpul?

Actually, I AM accepting God's Word.  I am not the one who seems to be making assumptions.

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

Clearly Adam died spiritually that day, and physically, he died many years after.

Well, bingo.  The "dying" in the Hebrew refers to the process of physical death.  And it began "on that day".

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

  It's not just God's word in Genesis, but notice that God points out that Adam was not immortal, even expressing concern that he might become so.

OK.  ?

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

But it's also a matter of us accepting that Jesus died to save us from death.

Why preach to me?  Of course He did.  

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

  If He came to save us from physical death, He failed.   We will all die physically someday.   It was a spiritual death from which we were saved, not a physical death.

Exactly!

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

Just accept His word as it is, and all the problems are resolved.  

Why reject the FACT that in the Hebrew there are 2 deaths?  "dying, you shall die".

That's 2.

 

[The Barbarian]

4 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Research the internet regarding Gen 2:17.  In the Hebrew, it says "dying, thou shalt die".  There is no "addition" to God's word.  There is recognition of His Word.

Reworking that to "you will die physically that day" would mean that God was not telling us the truth about Adam not dying physically for many years thereafter.   God being truthful, the revised meaning cannot be true.

I get that if you spend a great deal of word juggling and add a few unscriptural assumptions, you can get to that conclusion.   Why not just accept it God's way, without all that extraneous pilpul?

4 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Actually, I AM accepting God's Word.

If you were, you wouldn't be telling us something different   Why not just accept it His way?

4 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

 The "dying" in the Hebrew refers to the process of physical death.  And it began "on that day".

That's not what God said, though.   He said he would die that day.   Not "you will start to die that day, but actually you'll live on for many years afterwards."   

If He came to save us from physical death, He failed.   We will all die physically someday.   It was a spiritual death from which we were saved, not a physical death.

4 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Exactly!

If you'll believe Jesus, why won't you believe the Father?

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

This is the death that Adam brought into the world and the one Jesus died to save us from.

I don't see why this should be so hard to understand.   God says so.  Why not just believe Him?

4 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Why reject the FACT that in the Hebrew there are 2 deaths?

Your ASSUMPTION is that there are two.   It's unclear why it's so important for you to add one more death to God's word.

[FreeGrace]

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

Reworking that to "you will die physically that day" would mean that God was not telling us the truth about Adam not dying physically for many years thereafter.   God being truthful, the revised meaning cannot be true.

Why do you think I was trying to "rework" Gen 2:17 into what I NEVER said.  Of course Adam did not die physically that day.  But did the aging process (which leads to physical death) begin that day?  Of course it did.

If you want to argue about the two mentions of death in Gen 2:17, go find a Hebrew scholar.

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

I get that if you spend a great deal of word juggling and add a few unscriptural assumptions, you can get to that conclusion.   Why not just accept it God's way, without all that extraneous pilpul?

Let's not accuse others of what they are NOT doing.  "word juggling".  Nonsense.  There are 2 mentions of death in Gen 2:17.  Why does that bother you so much?

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

If you were, you wouldn't be telling us something different   Why not just accept it His way?

I certainly have.  Why not just accept the 2 deaths yourself?

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

That's not what God said, though.   He said he would die that day.   Not "you will start to die that day, but actually you'll live on for many years afterwards."

He told Adam, "dying, you will die".  And all that would be "on that day" when Adam sinned.  And it all came to pass.  He died spiritually, and the aging process began on that day.

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

If He came to save us from physical death, He failed.

Of course He never came for that.  Heb 9:27 says that man is appointed ONCE to die, and then the judgment.  Why would Jesus come to earth and contradict God's Word?

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

   We will all die physically someday.   It was a spiritual death from which we were saved, not a physical death.

Seems there is really some kind of "communication problem" going on here, since I NEVER said anything about Jesus saving anyone from physical death.

Maybe you could find where you think I said that and share.

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

If you'll believe Jesus, why won't you believe the Father?

Don't be silly.  I believe both of them.  What a ridiculous question.  

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

This is the death that Adam brought into the world and the one Jesus died to save us from.

Yep.  Adam did bring death into the world.  Both spiritual and physical death.  Gen 2:17 says so.

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

I don't see why this should be so hard to understand.   God says so.  Why not just believe Him?

Silly question again.  I do believe Him.  Seems the problem is on your side.

On 4/18/2023 at 4:41 PM, The Barbarian said:

Your ASSUMPTION is that there are two.   It's unclear why it's so important for you to add one more death to God's word.

Gen 2:17 gives us 2.  Why are you so adamant that there aren't?

[The Barbarian]

Reworking that to "you will die physically that day" would mean that God was not telling us the truth about Adam not dying physically for many years thereafter.   God being truthful, the revised meaning cannot be true.

57 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Why do you think I was trying to "rework" Gen 2:17 into what I NEVER said.

Claiming that the one death God mentions happened long after that day, when God cleaerly says it will happen that day, is a reworking of His word.  No way to avoid it.  

58 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Of course Adam did not die physically that day.

Because God clearly meant that one death to be spiritual.  If He had meant a physical death, Adam would have died that day.

59 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

 But did the aging process (which leads to physical death) begin that day?

God doesn't say it did.    That's man's addition to scripture to make it more acceptable to man's wishes.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

 There are 2 mentions of death in Gen 2:17.

Nope.  Just one.   And it was to happen on the day that Adam ate from that tree, as God says.  

Everything else is man's addition.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Yep.  Adam did bring death into the world.  Both spiritual and physical death.  Gen 2:17 says so.

Well, let's take a look...

Gen. 2:17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

He did eat, and he did die that day, as God predicted.  But as you see, it's a spiritual death.   The serprent was a Biblical literalist, and told Eve that she wouldn't die.   (And she didn't die physically)    The serpent was a master of lying by telling half a truth.

I see how badly you want to make "the death" a physical one.   But it just won't fit.   Jesus specifically said He came to save us from the death that Adam brought into the world.   If He came to save us from a physical death, He failed.    We all die physically.   But if we trust in Him and His word, we will not die that death Adam suffered.

Trust Him.

 

[Tristen]

@FreeGrace & @The Barbarian

Sorry to but-in to your conversation uninvited.

You've covered this somewhat already, but the Hebrew of Genesis 2:17 would more accurately be translated "in dying, you will die", and not "you shall surely die". The latter interpretation is a translation choice, and not a direct transliteration.

The wording is ambiguous, leading to much scholarly debate about what this passage actually means.

If we are being honest, apart from personal faith, no one can really claim to know what this wording means - except to say that it does not mean that Adam would take his last physical breath on that day.

It could, however, still mean a physical death - in the same sense that a flower cut from the plant still shows all the signs of life, though it has now transferred from growth to decay - even if the time of decay can be extended by putting the flower cutting in nutrient water (i.e. it is both 'technically' dead, but also in the process of death from the moment it was cut off from the parental plant).

Or it could mean spiritual death - being cut off from the breath/life/spirit of God.

Or it could mean both (or something else).

Arguments therefore have to be made from alternative verses of scripture - since no honest contributor can claim exclusive, dogmatic knowledge of how to correctly interpret Genesis 2:17. Anyone who insinuates that only their preferred interpretation is correct is being disingenuous with the available information.

 

 

 

[FreeGrace]

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Claiming that the one death God mentions happened long after that day, when God cleaerly says it will happen that day, is a reworking of His word.  No way to avoid it.

OK, if you aren't going to read my posts, why should I reply to yours?  The FACT remains that two deaths are referenced in Gen 2:17, whether one believes that or not.

God never mentioned only "one death".  That's what the English says, but the Hebrew references 2.

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

 Because God clearly meant that one death to be spiritual.  If He had meant a physical death, Adam would have died that day.

I've already explained all this, so no need to repeat myself.  Adam clearly did die spiritually that day.  And the physical death process (aging) BEGAN on that day.

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Nope.  Just one.   And it was to happen on the day that Adam ate from that tree, as God says.

Try doing a google search.  

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Everything else is man's addition.

Well, let's take a look...

Gen. 2:17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

He did eat, and he did die that day, as God predicted.  But as you see, it's a spiritual death.   The serprent was a Biblical literalist, and told Eve that she wouldn't die.   (And she didn't die physically)    The serpent was a master of lying by telling half a truth.

It appears none of what I post has sunk in.  

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

I see how badly you want to make "the death" a physical one.   But it just won't fit.   Jesus specifically said He came to save us from the death that Adam brought into the world.   If He came to save us from a physical death, He failed.    We all die physically.   But if we trust in Him and His word, we will not die that death Adam suffered.

Trust Him.

This is pathetic.  I don't "want to make the death a physical one", and those who ACTUALLY read what I post know that.

I have repeatedly acknowledged that Adam died spiritually THAT day.  Got it?  Seems you didn't get the memo.

Since it appears my posts aren't being read, let's just let it be, ok?  I'm tired of having to keep correcting all the errors in your posts.

[FreeGrace]

13 minutes ago, Tristen said:

@FreeGrace & @The Barbarian

Sorry to but-in to your conversation uninvited.

You've covered this somewhat already, but the Hebrew of Genesis 2:17 would more accurately be translated "in dying, you will die", and not "you shall surely die". The latter interpretation is a translation choice, and not a direct transliteration.

The wording is ambiguous, leading to much scholarly debate about what this passage actually means.

If we are being honest, apart from personal faith, no one can really claim to know what this wording means - except to say that it does not mean that Adam would take his last physical breath on that day.

It could, however, still mean a physical death - in the same sense that a flower cut from the plant still shows all the signs of life, though it has now transferred from growth to decay - even if the time of decay can be extended by putting the flower cutting in nutrient water (i.e. it is both 'technically' dead, but also in the process of death from the moment it was cut off from the parental plant).

Or it could mean spiritual death - being cut off from the breath/life/spirit of God.

Or it could mean both (or something else).

Arguments therefore have to be made from alternative verses of scripture - since no honest contributor can claim exclusive, dogmatic knowledge of how to correctly interpret Genesis 2:17. Anyone who insinuates that only their preferred interpretation is correct is being disingenuous with the available information.

Thank you!

[The Barbarian]

2 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

OK, if you aren't going to read my posts, why should I reply to yours?  The FACT remains that two deaths are referenced in Gen 2:17, whether one believes that or not.

God never mentioned only "one death".  That's what the English says, but the Hebrew references 2.

You've just assumed what you proposed to prove.  So until you can show that the one death God spoke of was really two deaths, and that Jesus only managed to save us from one of them, you're not doing very well.

I get that you keep repeating your assumptions.   But without any support for them, it's just repeating the same assumptions.

The key remains the fact that Jesus saved us from the death that Adam brought into the world.   It if was a physical death as well as a spiritual death, then Jesus only got it half done.

And for me, that closes out any possibility of the one death God spoke of, being two deaths.

 

 

[FreeGrace]

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

You've just assumed what you proposed to prove.

Why not just do some easy research, instead of throwing these silly comments.

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

  So until you can show that the one death God spoke of was really two deaths, and that Jesus only managed to save us from one of them, you're not doing very well.

Easy.  Words mean things.  Did Adam die on THAT day?  Yes.  Did the aging process result in his death 930 years later?  Yes.  Case closed.

10 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

I get that you keep repeating your assumptions.   But without any support for them, it's just repeating the same assumptions.

The key remains the fact that Jesus saved us from the death that Adam brought into the world.   It if was a physical death as well as a spiritual death, then Jesus only got it half done.

And for me, that closes out any possibility of the one death God spoke of, being two deaths.

I think we're done here.  You're just not letting any facts in.

[The Barbarian]

You've just assumed what you proposed to prove.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Why not just do some easy research, instead of throwing these silly comments.

I showed you what God says.   What do you have to top Him?

So until you can show that the one death God spoke of was really two deaths, and that Jesus only managed to save us from one of them, you're not doing very well.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Easy.  Words mean things.

Yep.  God says that the one death He mentions would happen that day.   And it did.  But as you now see, it was a spiritual death, not a physical one.   And Jesus saved us from that spiritual death, not a physical one.   Why not just let it be God's way?

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Did the aging process result in his death 930 years later?

Yep. Adam was never immortal.  Indeed God expresses concern that he might become so, and takes steps to be sure that he never did.  The death God spoke of was to happen that day.    If God tells the truth, we know that the death was not a physical one.  Case closed.

You're just not letting any facts in.   I think we're done here.