On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 21:43:37 -0500 "Charles Carrigan"
Whether the ancients recognized spiritual death as we do I cannot say. I
wasn't there. But Genesis 2:17 declares that the _day_ of eating he dies.
This is explicit in the Hebrew text however it is translated. But Adam's
physical life continued for centuries. Seems to me that equating the
death on eating to losing physical life makes the passage nonsense.
I clearly wasn't around at the time either, but I wasn't around when
dinosaurs walked the earth. That doesn't mean we can't know anything
about what was going on at the time. By looking at other writings of
ancient Hebrews over the centuries, it seems as though the idea of life
after death didn't exist early on in their thinking. David wrote in
Psalm 6 - "No one remembers You when he is dead. Who praises you from
The dinosaurs and the Garden are totally different matters. Though I
claim no expertise in paleontology, I have seen the fossilized bones of
dinosaurs of various sizes, their footprints at the Paluxy river site,
etc. There are adequate reasons to give them an ancient date. In total
contrast, no one has discovered the bones of Adam and, had they been
discovered, I find no way to determine precisely the date of death or his
age at death, let alone what he had been told. This has nothing to do
with a recognition of life after death--Adam's spiritual life was gone
even as his physical life continued. Note that spiritual life, as Adam
had it before the Fall if we take the passage literally, is not the same
as resurrection life, of which we now have a token or foretaste. I
haven't yet been glorified, though God says it's done.
Gen. 2:17 says that "for when you eat of it you will surely die." (NIV).
Most translations are a little more emphatic about it, saying 'on that
day' and such. Yes, this is pretty explicit. This was a warning to Adam
(Eve wasn't around yet). However, Adam and Eve didn't die (physically)
on the day they ate the fruit. Is it so nonsensical that God could have
simply changed His mind about the punishment He would inflict upon them?
I checked the Hebrew text. "Day" is explicit.
At the begining of this semester, I started teaching my first large
college class. I told my students (~100 in the class) that if anyone
missed an exam with an unexcused absence, they would receive a zero for
that exam. It just so happened that a very good student happened to
oversleep his alarm on exam day. I hadn't thought about the policy very
much before I made it. Now I had a chance to really think this through.
A zero on an exam is twice as bad as a 50% failure. I decided that was
too harsh of a penalty, as it amounted to a student failing two of 5
exams. I know he didn't intentionally oversleep, and I know I've done
exactly what he did in the past. So I changed my mind about the
student's punishment for his wrong actions, and decided to be more
merciful. Is it so obsurd that God could have also decided He really
didnt' want them to die that day, and instead gave a different, less
severe punishment?&n! bsp;
I understand very well that you did not think things through completely.
I'm human too. But can you imply that God is as thoughtless as we? Why do
I think that Romans 3:4--"Let God be true, and every man a liar"--fits
here? On the other hand, there are those who adopt Open Theology. If
they're right, then Romans 8:29f is a lie.
Received on Sun Sep 26 19:47:36 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Sep 26 2004 - 19:47:38 EDT