Brian, you made a mistake in English comprehension. ...in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. You wrongly applied "day" also to the latter. If God intended "die that very day" then it would have been written "for in the day that thou eastest thereof is the day that thou will surely die".
Prove that Adam was going to die anyway. The bible points out that man can live forever if he continues to eat of the tree of life (hence the name 'tree of life'). That is why God kicked man out of the garden and had an angel guard the entrance.
God's intentions was either that man would die that very day or a day in the future. Since God didn't actually say that Adam was to die the very day he ate of the tree then it can't be proven that God lied.
Adam was mortal, he was dying from the moment he was created.
No offense but you should take some classes in critical thinking, logic, or mathematical proof. Because any argument where one makes the most simplest of logical fallacies is a waste of time.
I said prove to me that Adam was going to die anyway (was mortal) and not use a circular argument. Your argument is equivalent to "The ball is red because it is red", which is circular. Thus you haven't proven that Adam was going to die regardless of whether he ate from the tree of knowledge or not. You must prove that he was mortal without the tree of life.
No it does not say that.
What it actually says in Genesis 3:22 is:
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
So â€˜take alsoâ€™ obviously means that Adam has not eaten from the Tree of Life yet, if he did he would be like God, an eternal being. You only need to eat the from the Tree of Life once to become like God.
Ainâ€™t it annoying when the Bible doesnâ€™t say what you would like it to?
Many consider the text "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" to mean spiritual death. Prove to me that it couldn't have meant spiritual death.
God shows mercy here. Eating of the tree of life to live forever in a state of death (spiritual) and alienation is very bad (eternal torture).
And you are again using silly logic. God didn't want man "to know good and evil" and "take also" of the tree of life (by the reasoning above). To "take also" doesn't mean nor implies that one has never taken the said thing before. I can say to you, "take also the penny". That doesn't mean you have never taken a penny before.
Of course, He had to protect the Tree of Life. If anyone eats from it they become eternal, just like God. You donâ€™t have to keep eating from it.
What? Another baseless assumption. Prove that one only has to eat of the tree once in order to be eternal. Don't use circular reasoning now.
Also know that God allowed Adam and Eve to eat of every tree in the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Gen 2:16).
Well I just proved it.
But, to be serious for a moment, we really need to look at the Bible in context. The Adam and Eve myth doesnâ€™t mean that anybody lied, Israelite philosophers were the same as any other nationsâ€™ philosophers, they came up with stories to explain the world around them. Suffering and evil was obviously a big concern in the ancient world, thus the Israelite philosophers came up with this tale, heavily borrowed from Mesopotamian mythology, to explain why the world could be such a shitty place.
God didnâ€™t lie, Satan didnâ€™t lie, the creators of this myth MAY have lied, but since God and Satan are literary inventions we cannot say they lied.
What we could say is that the mythological character Yahweh lied in the Book of Genesis.
Isnâ€™t ancient mythology amazing?
Baseless assertions with no proof makes arguments a total waste of time.
If God lied in Genesis where the book of Genesis is just a made up myth then it is clear that it makes no sense for author to contradict his self (due to a lack of intelligence) when it clear that he had a sufficient amount of intelligence in order to write Genesis in the first place.
Um, what mercy is being shown? This eternal torture in hell according to the Bible is the fate of the vast majority of humanity is it not?
According to some banned books of the bible (see banned from the bible) those who will go to hell will eventually get out. So shhhhh (don't tell). I'm just kidding. Also some interpret hell in the bible as a place where one dies for good (cease to exist in any form). This too is like an eternal punishment.
But mercy is mercy. Mercy isn't necessarily letting someone get off scott free. If the courts sentence someone to 50 years instead of 50 years and 1 day then they showed mercy.
God showed mercy by having Jesus die for our sins. Thus we have a better chance to not go to hell than we would if He didn't. This is still mercy no matter how small you think it is.
He didn't? Than why put it there in the first place? This is equivalent of putting a box of matches in front of a toddler and saying do not touch and walking out of the room and returning to find the house burnt down and then punishing the child (if they survive). Where is God's moral responsibility in this act? Is he not the more culpible moral agent in this story not the freshly minted and inexperience persona's of Adam and Eve?
God set this all up in grand scheme of things in order to transform man into the beings He want us to become. He could've have made us that way from the beginning, but that would be equivalent of having a robot worship and love you. If the angels, who were created good, can be wicked then mankind can as well. God knew this and He knew it was just a matter of time before man showed his wickedness. So he knew his grand plan even before it started.
God has supreme power of life and death (we don't), so him putting anything around that can hurt us is okay as long as his will gets accomplished.
As for punishment, God had to set an example. If He didn't (by punishment) then man has absolutely no reason to obey God and all control to transform man is gone. The punishment is just a form of control, mercy, and a transformation device.
And you, yourself do not provide evidence that falsifies this statement as well. So your statment commenting that Brians statements are baseless, are themselves baseless as well. If you want to back up your statement, than you should start a new topic and provide evidence supporting your statements. BTW, if you do I will provide evidence supporting Brian's assertions as well.
Brian was the one making claims, not me. He said that man was already going to die whether he ate from the tree of knowledge or not. I simply asked him to prove this. He didn't. Thus what he said was baseless.
Um, I think Brian was saying that the God (Yahweh, Elohim, El-Shaddai, whatever) of the Bible is a mytholical figure and thus it makes no difference what his actions in the Bible are anyways not that there is a real God and that he actually lied in the book of Genesis.
BTW, there are many other religious books that have some very profound theology and philosophical musings which could be considered on par if not surpass the "intelligence" of the events in the book of Genesis i.e. try reading the Buddhist or Hindu Sutras concerning creation: How is this for being unintilligent?
The excerpt myth you posted is nowhere near as profound as the bible. Nothing is!
With that said, my point was that it is inconsistent for someone to write the the profound book of Genesis and incompetently make such a simple and dumb contradiction (God lying), especially when their purpose was to show that God is both the truthful and the most powerful one.