dzim77

My point is that the account suggests Adam is created as immortal. One of the consequences of his sin is mortality. This is a significant consequence to say the least.

Another consequence of his sin was a kind of separation from God... that A&E lost the intimacy or friendship with God that they originally enjoyed.

So the Genesis account presents us with the consequence of A & E's sin as both physical and spiritual.

Mihilz

Where does it suggest that Adam is created immortal?

GakuseiDon

I think that "on that day" means "on that day", but that what happens on that day is that "their fate is sealed", i.e. death became an inevitability. This is because on that day they are removed from the Tree of Life.

Mihilz

I think that God lied because the serpent basically said, "you won't die; you will be enlightened instead". It's presented in such a way that it's either/or.

God didn't confirm it after he found out they had eaten the fruit. I would have thought that if an eventual death is what was meant by God then he would have followed it up by saying "I told you so. For now, you will surely die".

Also, if eating from the tree of knowledge once is enough to perpetuate it's effect why would the tree of life be any different? Why do Adam & Eve need to continuously replenish their life but not their knowledge?

spin

Ultimately I don't really mind the use of "surely" due to inability of other means to translate the idea in English of MWT TMWT, "a death you will die". I gave the literal to show what was actually in the text. There is no adverb: it is only added by the translator as a roundabout way of dealing with the text.

But as to the confabulation about the significance of BYWM... MWT TMWT, one just needs to look at 1 K 2:36-46. Shimei is told that on the day he crosses the Wadi Kidron he shall die, so three years later when he finally left Jerusalem and crossed the Kidron he was killed, ie that same day. It doesn't mean that he will "be doomed to die", but "die".


spin

Amaleq13

Gotcha. Unfortunately, I haven't found any biblical examples to support that interpretation. In fact, they all seem to indicate that the consequence will be literally on that same day.

Jayhawker Soule

OK.

Yes, spin, "one just needs to look at 1 K 2:36-46", but it helps ever so much if you actually read it rather than read into it...

36. And the king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him, "Build for yourself a house in Jerusalem, and dwell there, and do not go forth here or there."
37. And it shall be, on the day (that) you go out, and you pass over the Kidron Valley you shall know for certain that you shall surely die; your blood shall be upon your own head.
38. And Shimei said to the king, "The saying is good; as my lord the king has said, so will your servant do; and Shimei dwelt in Jerusalem many days.
39. And it came to pass at the end of three years, that two of Shimei's slaves ran away to Achish the son of Maachah, king of Gath, and they told Shimei, saying, "Behold your slaves are in Gath.
40. And Shimei arose, saddled his ass, and went to Gath to Achish, to seek his slaves, and Shimei went, and brought his slaves from Gath.
41. And it was told to Solomon, that Shimei had gone from Jerusalem to Gath and had returned.
42. And the king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him, "Did I not make you swear by the Lord, and forewarned you, saying, "On the day that you go out and go here or there, know for certain, that you shall surely die, and you said to me, "The word is good (that) I have accepted."
43. And why have you not kept the oath of the Lord, and the commandment with which I have charged you?"
44. And the king said to Shimei, "You know all the wickedness, which your heart knew secretly, that you did to David, my father; and the Lord shall return your wickedness upon your own head."
45. And king Solomon [shall be] blessed, and the throne of David shall be established before the Lord forever.
46. And the king commanded Benaiahu the son of Jehoiada, and he went out and fell upon him, and he died; and the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon.

- from Judaica Press Tanach

So, what do we have here? Apparently,

• 37 - The king warns Shimei: 'skip town and on that day you will surely die'
• 39 - Shimei's slaves bolt.
• 40 - Shimei goes "to Gath to Achish, to seek his slaves".
• 40 - some time later he finds his slaves.
• 40 - some time later he returns to Jerusalem
• 41 - some time later Solomon is told that Shimei left and returned.
• 42 - some time later the king reminds Shimei of what was said three years previously.
• 42 - [Shimei leaves]
• 46 - some time later the king commands Benaiahu to carry out his threat.
• 46 - some time later Benaiahu kills our friend Shimei.

And you, informed by your skill at literal translation and compelled by your disdain for "confabulation", somehow divine that

he finally left Jerusalem and crossed the Kidron he was killed, ie that same day.

Perhaps, but for those of us for whom such revelation is inaccessible, there appears zero reason to embrace your claim as (if you'll forgive the term) gospel. If, however, we render 1 Kings 2:37 as Alter might, ...

Jayhawker Soule

And the reason a guy "created as immortal" would require a centrally located tree of life would be what?

Jayhawker Soule

As always, I envy your clarity. I also appreciate Alter's expertise as a Hebraist, Sarna's understanding of the text, and the similar understanding reflected in Pseudo-Jonathan.

And to think I was applauding your clarity ...

I seriously doubt that you have any insight on what Judaism emphasizes, nor do I believe that the question of "niceness" is relevant.

Judaism is and was intensely (and at times obsessively) interested in understanding Torah and in resolving its apparent contradictions. Read, for example, Fixing God's Torah (or via: amazon.co.uk). Apparently, this effort more than once took the form of 'Harmonizations' and "Exegetical Changes", as noted in Emanuel Tov's Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk), pg. 261-262.

I find it noteworthy that the text survived such scrutiny. You do not. OK.

spin

You can try to repackage the event as you like, stretching the carrying out of the sentence as far as you like for effect, but you change nothing. The same day Solomon learnt of Shimei leaving Jerusalem, Shimei was killed.

The best you can hope for is a lag between the time Shimei did it and Solomon learnt about it. Do you seriously want to claim that this god is presented as not being in the state to know when the fruit was eaten? Whatever the case, when he did learn about the eating, he didn't kill the criminals, did he? You still have to get in line to corrupt the text.



I can understand you saying that. You must have to believe that "on that day you will die" doesn't mean what it says, otherwise the text would be caught in a modern literalist's contradiction, which I gather is some sort of problem for you.

You back yourself into this corner. Get out by yourself.


spin