The Muwth Muwth fist fight or death match 2008.

Hermeneutics isn't pretty. Muwth Muwth is about the worst example. The translations arent real good. Any handle anyone seems to get is only partial. There are some giants in this thing, Young, Darby, KJV. But, I can get a few licks in too.

There are problems with this translation as follows: 1. after sinning, Adam did not die the same day, suggesting that God was in error; 2. the concept of "spiritual death" is a phrase that means whatever you want, or is a cover for simply not having an interpretation; 3. inferring meaning from the mere repetition of nouns in a foreign language is not easy.

Part of the problem in this phrase is that it is like a fish trying to understand water. Two concepts are involved: time (in that day) and death (akin to taxes). With about 7,000 years of days recorded in scripture, which day are we talking about? If death is so pervasive, should we even worry about the inevitable such that we can discern what is being said here?

My suggestion is that sacrifice of Isaac may be a bit of the key, as well as that appointed day on Golgotha. Some of the precision of the Bible is best revealed in its patterns for calendars and sacrifices. As an overlay to perceive things like the sacrifice of Isaac and causing one's children to "pass through the fire", suddenly there is far less spirituality and far more grisly concern of life and death in this area. In short, there is a regime in view.

It has laws and requires death, which can be exchanged for time. As the soldier clone says in Blade Runner, "I want more life, F'er." As God says to Abraham, The Lord has prepared himself a sacrifice. As Jesus says, he comes to give life, and life more abundantly.

GENESIS 2 AND 3.

In KJV, the phrase is as follows:

Gen 2:17 But of the tree 06086 of the knowledge 01847 of good 02896 and evil 07451, thou shalt not eat 0398 of it: for in the day 03117 that thou eatest 0398 thereof thou shalt surely 04191 die 04191 .

The last phrase from "thou" is "muwth muwth."

Most translations, such as KJV, say "you shall surely die". Young translates this as "dying you shall die" in Gen. 2.

Ironcially enough, the first hermeneutic represented in scripture is a boner. Eve represents what God says as "muwth", not "muwth muwth." God has a rather sophisticated sense of humor.

The Phrase "muwth muwth" is a terribly difficult matter. Perhaps like me you have always been uncomfortable with the translations, since they never quite make sense. As a lawyer, I would tell you that you would never get a conviction based on the King James version of these words.


MUWTH MUWTH IS A DEATH SENTENCE, NOT THE CONDITION OF MAN ITSELF

There are a few hints in other uses of this combination of nouns. The story of Abimelech and Abraham uses both "muwth" and "muwth muwth". You will recall that Abraham, chosen of God, is too afraid to trust God to protect him from the Jealousy of Abimelech. Apparently Sarai is a real hotty. He allows here to be received into the harem, saying that she is but his sister.

The first use is "muwth" for the pagan King:

Gen 20:3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, "Indeed you [are] a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she [is] a man's wife."

However, Abimelech, wisely pleads with God for mercy. God acknowledges the integrity of his heart! Anyone find this strange? Hello, ACLU? Then, we have the phrase "muwth muwth":

Gen 20:7 "Now therefore, restore the man's wife; for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you and you shall live. But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours."

Quite a lot gets unpacked by KJV out of "muwth muwth": http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-b...&version=KJV#7

The use of "muwth" in 20:3 is sort of a moot point. Of course a human and pagan king is a walking dead man. We all are, but for Jesus. Possibly that is the significance -- a man already under the curse of death who is simply inviting death yet again by sin -- sort of like multiple death sentences, maybe. But, since God speaks to him, this is of course the model for saving revelation of God, which is the only basis for escaping muwth.

The phrase "muwth muwth" is not a statement of this man's condition in 20:7. It is a conditional statement of legal consequences. After God speaks (ie, gives life), there is a legal consequence for rejecting the gift. So, would conscious disobedience result in immediate death? Funny how immediacy is our first concern, usually. What should be of greater concern is that a pagan king in Gath (philistia), a land of child sacrifice, is in direct relationship (speaking with) God. Disobedience would certainly put that at risk, resulting in a sentence of death, regardless of when it would be carried out. The transition from 20:3 to 20.7 is from God saying, you are toast, to God saying, this is how you avoid being toast. First, there is a statement of condition. Subsequently, there is a statement of the terms of a relationship, conditions for a future with God and the nature of the legal bondage that would result from bad choices.

Oddly enough, singular muwth in Genesis refers to the dead, as in corpses, or death in the past tense.

Other uses of muwth muwth as a statement of being under the sentence of death:

Jdg 13:22 And Manoah 04495 said 0559 unto his wife 0802, We shall surely 04191 die 04191 , because we have seen 07200 God 0430.

Jdg 13:23
But his wife said unto him, If the LORD were pleased to kill us, he would not have received a burnt offering and a meat offering at our hands, neither would he have shewed us all these [things], nor would as at this time have told us [such things] as these.
Is it coincidence that sacrificial death here is the answer to human death? In other words, there is a sentence that is commuted by sacrifice.

Recall that Adam, being afraid, was trying hard not to be within eyeshot of God after the fall.

While the story of Abimelech suggests a "spiritual death", in that it defines relationship with God, here we have the Levitical relationship for substitutionary sacrifice to buy people time.

"Muwth muwth" again appears after Ahimelech the priest has been observed with David, whom Saul is trying to kill.

1Sa 22:16
And the king said, Thou shalt surely die, Ahimelech, thou, and all thy father's house.
Interestingly enough, the servants of the king first refuse to carry out the sentence, since Ahimelech is not deserving. But, Doeg (meaning "fearful") the Edomite does carry out the order. The notion of a delayed sentence of death in the people of God's promise ought to resonate. Adam, also fearful, suffers a curse for his disobedience and the sentence of death is not remitted in Gen. 3.

Again, there is a delayed sentence, which impacts due to the fear of man.


THE STORY OF ABRAHAM IS THE SATISFACTION OF LEGAL CLAIMS OF THE ENEMY EMBODIED IN MUWTH MUWTH.

In the story of Abraham and Isaac, God institutes a covenant, performing both ends of the covenant. Gen 15:8
And he said, Lord GOD, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?Following which there is the ceremony of dividing sacrificial animals and walking between the pieces, which God does after he puts Abram to sleep.

In Gen. 22, Abraham is to offer Isaac. Gen 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only [son] Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. Since we know the end of the story, we know that God spares Abaham and Isaac the agony of sacrifice, but also, apparently, God is dealing with a covenant relationship as well. In short, the requirements of "muwth muwth" are legally satisfied by the death that God himself provides.

By this, Abraham is multiplied. The usual canaanite form of multiplication was to offer your children. The fertility cults were a combination of pornography, carnal knowledge and bloody sacrifice.

The question is, does the pagan practice have anything to do with "muwth muwth" in Gen. 2? In Romans 5, Paul says that death "reigned" until Levitical sacrifice was introduced through Moses. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rom/Rom005.html#14 Paul also identifies the law itself with death. Jesus identified an adversary who was prince of this world.

Jhn 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

In Jude, satan himself is a dignitary and authority. http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-b...&version=kjv#8.

There is thus every evidence that Abraham was acting out a ceremony that was in fact the law of the land, and it was "muwth muwth." God surrepticiously aced the prince of this world by satisfying requirements under the authority of satan. "Muwth muwth" was the reign of the serpent. That reign was announced in Gen. 2. There were two ways to avoid it: 1. become God Almighty (being really, really like God, knowing curse and blessing); 2. A miracle from God.

Thus, KJV misses it in suggesting that Adam is going to drop dead the day he eats of the tree. Ironically, that would appear to be the nature of Eve's misstatement about the Word of God. Young's "dying you shall die" is more literal, but there is more going on here than morbidity, though that is certainly in view. And, if one must talk about "spiritual death", lets at least have some content to know what the heck that even means. The sacrifice of Isaac suggests that there is a blood and guts aspect of the relationship of spiritual death. But, it would also appear that Abimelech, for example is not suffering from spiritual death, at least not to the same extent.

WHAT DAY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

Yowm is still yowm. It is the day a relationship or covenant with death is created. It is not the day Adam drops dead.

Yowm is a measure of that curse, as in the tedium of dealing with a fallen world and waiting for salvation.

Yowm is also a particular day that the curse was satisfied. If the gospel means anything it is all about what a difference a day makes. The date for the offering of Jesus during the passover, was obviously a carefully planned satisfaction of Levitical requirements. Again, as Paul implies, the law that was satisfied was "muwth muwth."

Interestingly enough, Abraham seems to have been confused about what yowm is in view. Apparently he believed that Isaac being raised that day was the fulfillment of the promise. Hbr 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
Hbr 11:18 of whom it was said, "In Isaac your seed shall be called,"[fn4]
Hbr 11:19 concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.

However, less clear than the day of the curse is the day on which salvation arrives:

Rev 13:8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Col 2:15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.
Jhn 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Isa 53:5 But he [was] wounded for our transgressions, [he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
Hbr 4:8 For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.
Luk 12:39 But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and* not allowed his house to be broken into.
Luk 21:34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and [so] that day come upon you unawares.
1Th 5:4
But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he [was] not; for God took him.
Hbr 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Indeed, time flies when you're having fun.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations")
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

Don't you think you might be reading too much into a common Hebrew idiom? We find the same construction in Gen 2:16 the verse just before the warning 'dying you will die'. Young does not translate it literally but Green does Gen 2:16 LITV And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Eating you may eat of every tree in the garden. Is there some deep legal significance in the "akl thakl" of this invitation, or is it the simple Hebrew idiom we still hear today from a million Jewish mothers telling their sons "eat, eat!"

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Rubbish. "Spiritual death" is simply the suspension of relationship between God as ruler and man as obedient subject by man's conscious and wilful disobedience, which results temporally in sinful actions frustrating the possibilities of holy life and in the hereafter to eternal separation from the presence and pleasure of God. And as knowing and pleasing God is man's greatest goal, thus being separated from and being unable to please God is man's greatest punishment.

Don't project the mess of your theological chaos on others, please. Why should your incomprehension of "spiritual death" prevent us from using a perfectly workable concept?

Do not interpret the Bible with the aim of originality, of trying to find something new that nobody has seen before. People who do so are either vain and trying to prove their intelligence, or misguided by a false idea of spirituality which says that secret knowledge is what makes a Christian a good Christian; and their interpretation will probably be wrong.

- Douglas Stuart and Gordon Fee, How To Read The Bible For All Its Worth (emphasis in original)

__________________

[quote=shernren;47730858] LOL

So, what possibilities of holy life are you talking about?


LOL

Except it aint working, as in spoken by a man without an eschatology.

KJV does not make sense.

Young is a partial concept.

Vain? Hmmmm.... Not exactly.

So, what's my next line? Seems you're trolling for something.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations")
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

[quote=Assyrian;47719557] I absolutely think I might be. This is not easy stuff.

First, you need to demonstrate that it is an "idiom."

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations")
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

Originally Posted by busterdog

I absolutely think I might be. This is not easy stuff.

But great to get our teeth into it

I would have thought it was your responsibility to show that it isn't. You are going against a very large body of bible scholarship that treats the combination of infinitive + finite verb as a grammatical construction that simply strengthens or emphasises the verb, or leaves it untranslated.

We have a wide array of translations from literal, through dynamic equivalence, to paraphrases which which translate the double verb as the emphatic you will surely die or certainly die:
The AMP, ASV, AV, CSB(Holman), Darby, ESV, JPS, K21, NASB, NIRV, NIV, NKJ, NLT, NLV(NewLife), Webster and WEB
Others like the CEV, GoodNews, MSG, NCV, NRSV and RSV simply say 'you will die' not translating the the infinitive at all except that CEV, NCV and NRSV express the emphasis with an exclamation mark.

In the previous verse Gen 2:16, the combination of infinitive + finite verb, 'to eat you will eat' is translated with the more emphatic 'freely eat' or 'surely eat' by:
The AMP, ASV, AV, CSB(Holman), ESV, JPS, K21, NAB, NASB, NIV, NKJ, NLT, NLV(NewLife), RSV, Webster and WEB
It is simply translated 'you may eat' or 'you can eat' by the CEV, GoodNews, MSG, NCV, NIRV and NRSV

Young Literal Translation isn't even consistent in the way it translates this grammatical construction. For example we find the construction five times in Deuteronomy 15.

Deu 15:4 (ESV) But there will be no poor among you; for the LORD will bless you [to bless he shall bless you] in the land that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance to possess--
(YLT) only when there is no needy one with thee, for Jehovah doth greatly bless thee in the land which Jehovah thy God is giving to thee--an inheritance to possess it.

Deu 15:5 (ESV) if only you will strictly obey [to listen you are listening] the voice of the LORD your God, being careful to do all this commandment that I command you today.
(YLT) `Only, if thou dost diligently hearken to the voice of Jehovah thy God, to observe to do all this command which I am commanding thee to-day,

Deu 15:8 (ESV) but you shall open [to open you shall open] your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be.
(YLT) for thou dost certainly open thy hand to him, and dost certainly lend him sufficient for his lack which he lacketh.

Deu 15:10 (ESV) You shall give to him freely [to give you shall give], and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake.
(YLT) thou dost certainly give to him, and thy heart is not sad in thy giving to him, for because of this thing doth Jehovah thy God bless thee in all thy works, and in every putting forth of thy hand;

Deu 15:11 (ESV) For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, 'You shall open wide [to open you shall open] your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.'
(YLT) because the needy one doth not cease out of the land, therefore I am commanding thee, saying, Thou dost certainly open thy hand to thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy one, in thy land.

Young's doesn't translate the verb twice as he does in Genesis 2 but instead follows normal grammatical rules and emphasises the verb with words like 'certainly' 'diligently' or 'greatly'. The ESV does the same with 'strictly' 'freely' and 'wide' but twice takes the other option of simply leaving it untranslated.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I am mistrustful of the simplicity of translating a iconographic concept into a grammatical concept. The very notion of the infinitive arising from a "double negative" is not satisfying. The infinitive concept is there, just as the morbidity of Young's translation is present. But, neither concept seems exhaustive. So, I am looking around for more, thus the pause.


http://www.studylight.org/lex/heb/fr...ranslation=nsn

http://www.geocities.com/ladydi270_99/Alphabet.html

TET means to surround (letter value 9)


Literal meaning of the Letter; SNAKE, SURROUND
Sound of letter (t)


VAV means 'and', to add, to secure (letter value 6)


Literal meaning of the Letter; NAIL, PEG
Sound of letter(v)



MEM means liquid, massive, chaos (letter value 40)


Literal meaning of the Letter; WATER
Sound of letter (m)

There is some poetry there for sure.

http://www.abarim-publications.com/H...t_Meaning.html - slightly different take on the original hebrew

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations")
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

Here are some brain teasers. Complete this sequence:

2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17 ____

Here is another sequence:

Muwth, Muwth, __________

Or:

surrounding snake nails with ocean of chaos overwhelming enemy pegged one to raging waves of disorder ________________________________

This is not a sequence: Muwth. Perhaps that is just the end, as we usually use the word "death".

The nature of the infinitive is implied by later uses of the construction. We both had examples of the infinitive. As a gramatical construct, the concept is useful, but not exhaustive. If you remember the Star Trek episode where Captain Picard is teaching the alien Captain the story of Gilgamesh, you get a hint of what more is required. The very nature of the Hebrew language, combining numerical values, iconographic values and phonetic values into one symbol set, you end up with a more complicated, but in many ways clearer concept. Unfortunately, sometimes the simplest things are least clear.

In any event, Eve suggests a finality. Here Muwth is rather limited, and in error. KJV makes the same mistake. Imaging the way these words would have been originally have been received by Adam, as an iconographic sequence of concepts, death is not ultimate in any sense, but is rather a process.

Young gets closer to this issue. However, the spiritual struggle with chaos is not aparent in Young's translation.

Nor is the physical consequence of the entanglement of this process aparent in the notion of "spiritual death." Spiritual morbidity is aparently a better translation if one were to use English. Muwth is really a bit different in this sense that our "death."

What muwth muwth does in combine a number of concepts: drowning/morbidity, ongoing process if not anquished waiting through repetition, an adversary, being cutoff/surrounded by the enemy, disorder and chaos. It is actually a pretty sophisticated view of the situation that far exceeds the English translations.

Obviously as a death sentence, not a final death, we have the concept of an infinitive. And even within the word "infinitive" itself, there is a glimmer of the weariness and hopelessness of living under the curse. But, also a key to the distinction between walking with the Lord, whose presence is fullness of joy, and living with the repetitive slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations")
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

"LOL", busterdog? Sloppiness does no favors to your reputation. (And I'm supposed to be younger than you.)

God "will give to each person according to what he has done." To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For God does not show favoritism.
(Romans 2:6-11 NIV)

(emphasis added)

And that's just one passage. The Biblical concept of holy living that merits eternal life (or at least the possibility of such a thing, before the entrance of sin into the human condition) is comprehensively represented in every genre and section of the Bible.

"Without an eschatology", busterdog? Surely you jest! Most succinctly, I subscribe in full to the Apostles' Creed:

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.

Amen.

(emphases added)

Actually I think Young would make perfect sense even to a dyed-in-the-wool creationist:

... and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it --
dying [physically]
thou dost die. [spiritually]'
(Genesis 2:17 YLT)

In other words, in the day that they ate of the fruit, they would not only die spiritually (in an instantaneous severing of the right relationship between God and man), they would also begin to die physically (in a continual physical breakdown of the functioning and structure of their very bodies, until they returned to the dust).

Such an interpretation makes perfect sense of the verse. Any quest for originality when there is a perfectly functional interpretation is, as explained in my quote above, dangerous to say the least.

Just pointing out that this is really nothing more than pointless kabbalistic meddling. To think that we evolutionists are taken to task for non-literalness! Creationism is no guarantee of sound doctrine, for sure.

__________________