The Return of My Apple Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Did Adam die as soon as he ate the fruit?

Yes.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Yes.

The Bible disagrees, and if you want to argue that he died only spritually - whatever that means - fine, but that wasn't mentioned in the original threat.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible disagrees, and if you want to argue that he died only spritually - whatever that means - fine, but that wasn't mentioned in the original threat.

That "original threat" was written by Adam after-the-fact. Meaning that at the time he at it, he had been verbally warned - (and more than once, I would surmise).

 

[MrGoodBytes]

That "original threat" was written by Adam after-the-fact. Meaning that at the time he at it, he had been verbally warned - (and more than once, I would surmise).

So what did God originally say? "Thou shalt surely die" or "Thou shalt live 900 years and then die"?

 

[AV1611VET]

So what did God originally say? "Thou shalt surely die" or "Thou shalt live 900 years and then die"?

I wasn't there, and Adam didn't write it down --- so --- dunno.

A Hollywood version might go like this:

• God: Remember, Adam, don't eat of that tree, or you'll surely die.
• Adam: So I'll lay down and cease to live?
• God: No, you'll die another way first.
• Adam: What other way?
• God [tears in His eyes]: Someday you'll know.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

I wasn't there, and Adam didn't write it down --- so --- dunno.

A Hollywood version might go like this:

• God: Remember, Adam, don't eat of that tree, or you'll surely die.
• Adam: So I'll lay down and cease to live?
• God: No, you'll die another way first.
• Adam: What other way?
• God [tears in His eyes]: Someday you'll know.

I thought the Bible was infallible, and now you tell me that Adam omitted crucial parts himself?

 

[FishFace]

That "original threat" was written by Adam after-the-fact. Meaning that at the time he at it, he had been verbally warned - (and more than once, I would surmise).

But then Adam was wrong when he wrote that he would die "in the day" that he ate the fruit. Hence the Bible is wrong...

 

[LittleNipper]

I thought the Bible was infallible, and now you tell me that Adam omitted crucial parts himself?

Adam became aware that he was naked and tried to hide from GOD. Adam was spiritually dead. Anyone separated from GOD is dead. You are dead if you have not accepted CHRIST ----- dead in your sins ---- headed for eternal separation from GOD.

 

[LittleNipper]

But then Adam was wrong when he wrote that he would die "in the day" that he ate the fruit. Hence the Bible is wrong...

You are wrong because you are trying to establish an understanding without GOD's WORD as the guide. You are applying YOUR logic.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Originally Posted by FishFace
Did Adam die as soon as he ate the fruit?

Yes.

Don't miss

Adam-King of the Zombies

now playing at your local drive-in.

 

[thaumaturgy]

You are wrong because you are trying to establish an understanding without GOD's WORD as the guide. You are applying YOUR logic.

You know, I don't think there's a soul alive who would argue that indeed, the "death" proviso in Genesis is a metaphorical reading. Indeed it can be read that Adam was doomed to a "spiritual death" apart from God. All that is fine and dandy. But that is precisely where Literalists lose the battle. A metaphor is hardly a literal reading. It is a wholly reasonable and rational reading, but it isn't literal.

That's why people take Literalists to task for things they themselves don't believe. This is why most Christians aren't literalists...it is an irrational and "pick-and-choose" approach to the word o' God.

Think of it this way: this "death threat" is obviously metaphorical. Because Adam didn't die in that day he ate the fruit in a literal fashion. So why must the Flood be a literal thing? Why must the Garden of Eden be a literal thing?

If you would insist that the Flood be a literal event, and that Genesis Creation Account be literal in all ways, then why all of a sudden would this "death threat" not also be literal but wrong?

Why? Because a literalist has a vested interest in the Bible never being wrong. Ever. One error and their whole weak faith falls apart. So it becomes a matter of picking and choosing which is literal and which is metaphorical. Obviously Adam doesn't die here so this must be metaphorical.

Of course the geologists on here and throughout the last several centuries would say that "obviously there is no evidence for a global flood and in fact evidence of the lack of a global flood at one point in time" so they say "Ergo the Flood is a metaphor or a folk tale".

But for some people who don't understand the geology they still cling to the Literal Flood. They are, of course, uneducated in what the reality shows, but it is easy for them to unilaterally claim Literal Flood.

Ultimately, if they were to learn some geology, they'd likely have to acquiesce that the Flood, like the "Adam Death Threat" is not to be read literally as the words are printed on the page.

 

[Soul Searcher]

For those supporting spiritual death you really need to wake up. There is no such thing as a living soul who is spiritually dead. It is nothing more than mumbo jumbo to try an explain something that they do not understand but refuse to admit ignorance in.

The bible tells us straight up that God breathed the breath of life [spirit] into man and he became a living soul. It also tells us straight up that when a man dies his spirit returns to God who gave it.

There is no spiritual death, there is no one spiritually dead and those of you who believe whatever doctorine are not one tiny little bit better than those who believe nothing. Degrading others by saying they are spiritually dead while indicating that you are spiritually alive is arrogant and insulting to anyone who gives it a second thought.

As for Adam and his death. The common English version [KJV] does say that int he day that you eat of it you shall surely die. Many interpret that to mean that within a 24 hour period Adam would be dead but he was not. They then also assume that there can be no mistakes in the bible so they make up spiritual death and say that he died spiritually that day. If not this then usually they make a reference to Adam being imortal before and that on that day he began to die.

Both are wrong. Both seem to totally ignore the fact that the bible also says a day with God is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day. Adams death fell within the thousand years so it can be reconcilled without resorting to making things up like spiritual death or Adam being imortal from the begining. It also says that they were expelled from the garden lest they should eat of the tree of life and live forever. Which confirms that they were not imortal and needed the tree of life to continue beyond a point.

Now I do not believe the story should be taken literally at all but even a literal read of the bible when all things are considered will show that Adam was never imortal. That he did die within the day and that there is no such thing as a living soul with a dead spirit. Also for the seperation from God part no such thing can exist either. God is said to be every where, know everything, all the time. One can not hide nor be any place where he is not. Once again just mumbo jumbo spouted by some believers to cover up thier own ignorance on the subject. Apparently honestly is a rare quality in these circles.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

I wasn't there, and Adam didn't write it down --- so --- dunno.

Yet you claim he said something different from what was written in the bible. Sounds like somebody is a "literalist" only when it suits him.

 

[AV1611VET]

For those supporting spiritual death you really need to wake up.

Soul Searcher, you need to understand something. Death is nothing more than separation from something. You get a divorce, you've killed your marriage, etc.

5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

When Adam and Eve sinned, they were separated from God spiritually. Like taking someone off of Life Support.

And now, thanks to Adam, we're all born without Life Support, until such time as we get reconnected through the New Birth.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

Soul Searcher, you need to understand something. Death is nothing more than separation from something. You get a divorce, you've killed your marriage, etc.

So when someone is sexually dead, what are they separated from?

 

[dad]

God is eternal yes but that does nothing for your point about the earth. If I say my life has lasted for a week that would be a true statement but to interpret that as me being one week old would be an error. As for gave us eternal life that doesn't seem to be the case. The bible tells us that our spirit will return to God when we die and then it also tells us that in the fullness of times God will be all in all which strongly indicates that there will come a time when all will be one again just as it was in the begining.

Again there is no word in the Hebrew language that literaly means forever.

Verse 21:1 says that the old earth has passed away as have the heavens. In Matthew Jesus says that they will pass away.

Context. Obviously we live on the same planet, with the same line of people, and plants, etc. Neither the fire in the future, nor the flood in the past changes that.

The four corners of the earth. Foundations is not a basement. Then again this is just a missunderstanding of scripture on your part. The phrase "foundations of the earth" is refering to the begining of the earth, the formation, the establishment of it. It has nothing to do with a literal foundation as you seem to think it does.

Says you.

Actually it is obovious that men die, all men do. I have seen it happen many times myself. As I said before the meaning fo the word is not a literal forever and there is no word in Hebrew that means literaly forever. ages and ages is a non specific period of time but it has both a begining and an end. It is not forever and it is certianly not eternal which has no beining nor end.

Well, if there is an eternal God that gave eternal life, that settles it. That is the gift of God.

signified means to show by sign or symbol. The very first verse tells us that it is a book of signs and symbols. It should be obovious that it is so from readng the rest of the text as well. I have known this since I was a little boy. Even at 8 years old I could see this was all symbolic language.

No, nothing like that. It is a revealing of things by Jesus. Not a hiding of things.

How? It does not even so much as mention the word faith nor belief. In fact it has nothing at all to do with it. What it seperates is those who care about others from those who do not.

As far as some big separation that the bible talks about, maybe. I was simply denoting degrees of faith.

The present state of the earth will end before you read this message. It is constantly changing and it will end. Keep lying to yourself if that is what makes you happy but know that you are wrong.

No. There will still be slow light, and decay at the end of your post.

Desperate? No. Annoyed? Yes. I would I hide from fantasy? It is not real. It can do no harm. Your words have no bite, no fact, no data. You just have a pet belief and you stubbornly stick to it even though it does not match up to reality.

Have fun in your fantasy world.

If an apple was created, it is not up to man to claim it looks as if it might not be. Man couldn't know. To know is a good thing. Man should stick to what he knows. Know what I mean?

 

[NailsII]

There was no land, up till they crash landed on the side of a mountain, as the waters went down. They were in the ark over a year. No tree can live under water that long.

Can you provide evidence that trees cannot survve underwater for a year?
Can you provide even a rational explanation as to how all the animals survived a year without adequate food?
Can you even suggest how all the animals fitted on such tiny boat?
As far as I can see, the most obvious answer is that the floodwater receeded and the trees bacame visable again.
They didn't re-grow inside a week.
And besides, the story is only an analogy, probably based upon a story of a man who built a boat fo himself, his family and his cattle and escaped a rather large local flood. It is plainly obvious that they were not on a boat for a year.
Chinese whispers.
Maybe you should play it sometime.......

Gen 8: 10 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark; 11 And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.

Note how there is no mention of the trees magically re-growing in a short space of time.

The clear indication here is that Noah was comforted by the firm knowledge that trees were now growing again.

I beg to differ. See my previous response.

Well, that depends if the population is religious. If it is, why, the belief that is chosen for creation ought to be up to them.

Even if it differs from yours?
Even if it excludes jesus christ as lord and saviour?
Still won't get them into heaven, will it. And i would say that is pretty damn unfair really.
One more point, if Moses was leading god's chosen people, why did he not lift the curse of toiling/childbirth pain. He did lead them from slavery, sfter all.

No, I do not really know much about religion, sorry. But any heart that really has Jesus in it is a true heart. One to be trusted.

Like Jerry Falwell?
George W Bush?
I could go on forever, but I think you get the picture.

There is no same science from creation, as there is in the present. That is the point. Regardless of the mickey mouse benefits, the fact that all men are endangered by the WOMD moots the glories of PO science.

Is it only me who thinks this doesn't make any sense whatsoever?

Gravity, as I understand it, is not understood. Forget the forces that existed in some unknown past.

Gravity is pretty well understood; its forces can be calculated quite accurately and sound models of planetary movement created.

He will, yes. After He stops wicked reprobate satan worshiping, killer man, from killing us all.

Have you ever met a satan worshipper?
I always thought it was just an anti-authority phase that pampered kids tend to go through to seek attention.

Unless you were a believer by the time Jesus came back, you likely would not be allowed to be a survivor anyhow. Cheer up. Since I hear there is no free will in hell, that is not an issue. Now is your chance. I suggest you take it.

I'll take my chances thank you.
And here is a few good reasons why:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5JtxrR6msg

No, every eye shall see Him, even those that pierced Him.

I think He will give all a good chance to see the light, and chose.

Sounds fair.

Because God ain't like that. His creation will be restored, why would He let His original plan fail???

Afte he banned his original creation from Eden, wiped out all but one family i would have thought he would have a better chance in another corner of the universe.....

How do you know?

The bible only talks of one planet - this one.
It only talks of one moon, the lesser light.
There is no indication of the stars being thought of as suns or greater lights, which would be consistant with stone-age man's knowledge.
But an all-powerful deity should know better, especially if he created them all.
Shame he didn't tell anyone, he could have explained the pitfalls of astrology at the same time......

Adam became aware that he was naked and tried to hide from GOD. Adam was spiritually dead. Anyone separated from GOD is dead. You are dead if you have not accepted CHRIST ----- dead in your sins ---- headed for eternal separation from GOD.

So if you are ashamed at being naked then you are spiritually dead?
Hedonism here we come!!!!!!!

You are wrong because you are trying to establish an understanding without GOD's WORD as the guide. You are applying YOUR logic.

Maybe you should carefully consider the ramifications of this comment.
Maybe you are wrong because god's word is really man's word dressed up. But hey, I'll say no more because Thaumaturgy has answered much better than I could:

You know, I don't think there's a soul alive who would argue that indeed, the "death" proviso in Genesis is a metaphorical reading. Indeed it can be read that Adam was doomed to a "spiritual death" apart from God. All that is fine and dandy. But that is precisely where Literalists lose the battle. A metaphor is hardly a literal reading. It is a wholly reasonable and rational reading, but it isn't literal.

Maybe some of you should sit up and take notice.

 

[Soul Searcher]

Soul Searcher, you need to understand something. Death is nothing more than separation from something. You get a divorce, you've killed your marriage, etc.

I guess some people have different views but death is the absence of life and spiritual death of a living soul is fantasy. The bible explicitly says that the spirit is what made man a living soul take away the spirit and the flesh is dead literally physically dead. The spirit is the life force that animates and empowers the flesh. Without it we are not men. Whats more according to the bible the spirit does not die but returns to God who gave it.

When Adam and Eve sinned, they were separated from God spiritually. Like taking someone off of Life Support.

I totally disagree. Especially from a literal perspective. God walked in the garden. They were cast out of the garden and denied access to the tree of life. Thier spirit remained in them until thier flesh died then would dust return to the earth and the spirit to God.

 

[Soul Searcher]

Context. Obviously we live on the same planet, with the same line of people, and plants, etc. Neither the fire in the future, nor the flood in the past changes that.

Context? I do not consider ignoring what it says as context but rather willfill blindness on your part. It clearly states in Matthew that the earth will pass away, which means to perish, to cease to exist, to be gone. Then later in revelation before the new earth [note new earth not same earth] that the former has passed away. It could not be more clear.

Says you.

Yes says me and I would imagion that anyone with an once of logic would agree in part. It may seem strange to you but the earth is not a flat stationary object setting on a huge stone foundation with the heavens spread out above it.

Well, if there is an eternal God that gave eternal life, that settles it. That is the gift of God.

IF there you have it. If he gave eternal life that might settle it. I don't know about you but I stood by my mothers side and saw her die as I did also with my sister and I assure thier life was far from eternal. My sister was barely over 30 when she took her last breath.

Now the Spirit is what is said to be eternal it comes from God, is part of God and is in each and everyone of us. To be spiritually dead to to be physically totally and permanetly dead. The notions otherwise are laughable.

No, nothing like that. It is a revealing of things by Jesus. Not a hiding of things.

As usual you haven't got a clue do you These things were signified and John wrote what he saw. It was a vision, of symbols and signs. God is not going to literally take a candlestick from the church. There is no literal dragon perched to take over, almost nothing there is literal at all. It is all symbols and if you can not see that then I would think that it is a total waste of time to even attempt to discuss any of it with you.

As far as some big separation that the bible talks about, maybe. I was simply denoting degrees of faith.

I guess only you know what you were trying to get at since there is no mention of faith at all in the sheep and the goats story. Then again if having faith means to blindly accept whatever you imagion as truth then I guess yoru faith would rank up there much higher than mine. I tend to use reason, logic facts and faith to put together the most accurate picture that is possible which is always subject to change based on new information. You on the other hand start off by believing something then changing all the rules to make your preconceived fantasy look true to you.

No. There will still be slow light, and decay at the end of your post.

But there world has changed in billions of ways, things awlays change and eventually they all but dissapear.

If an apple was created, it is not up to man to claim it looks as if it might not be. Man couldn't know. To know is a good thing. Man should stick to what he knows. Know what I mean?

Or a more revelant question.. Do you know what you mean?

 

[dad]

[Can you provide evidence that trees cannot survve underwater for a year?

Can you provide evidence such a tree would cause Noah to be sure it was no OK to leave the ark? Or how such trees or plants could feed all the animals and people on the ark?? We need real live trees with fruit for that.

Can you provide even a rational explanation as to how all the animals survived a year without adequate food?

Yes, a combination of hibernation, semi hibernation, and fast gwoth rates still in effect. A few seeds in the planter in fron of the cows room, and voila! All the grass one could stuff themselves with. Piece of cake.

Can you even suggest how all the animals fitted on such tiny boat?

Yes, the fast evolution rates in effect mean just a sampling of the animals needed to be there. Or a kind.

As far as I can see, the most obvious answer is that the floodwater receeded and the trees bacame visable again.

Visible doesn't do anyone any good. Alive and well is needed. Growing fast too, I might add, or there is no way to feed all creatures.

They didn't re-grow inside a week.

Another evidence of this is the tree of life, it grows fruit every month of the year. That is different. Another evidence is that plants were made (planted, in the case of Eden) only days before we ate them.

And besides, the story is only an analogy, probably based upon a story of a man who built a boat fo himself, his family and his cattle and escaped a rather large local flood. It is plainly obvious that they were not on a boat for a year.
Chinese whispers.
Maybe you should play it sometime.......

Games aside, you just can't invent reasons God said there was a flood. He said it in many places, and Jesus also talked of it. No way round it.

Even if it differs from yours?
Even if it excludes jesus christ as lord and saviour?

Yes. How a bout a little freedom!!?? let the local population decide. If it is Christian, then let them teach that.

Still won't get them into heaven, will it. And i would say that is pretty damn unfair really.

School is not the only place non Christians could learn the gospel.

One more point, if Moses was leading god's chosen people, why did he not lift the curse of toiling/childbirth pain. He did lead them from slavery, sfter all.

Because God's people are always here. The universe change that resulted from the sins of man can't be dismissed willy nilly. Far as I can tell, there even was a 120 year warning leading up to it. Changing the universe back would affect all men, not just His people, and maybe they again would live a thousand years. That will have to wait till His rule comes.

Like Jerry Falwell?
George W Bush?
I could go on forever, but I think you get the picture.

I must confess we can't see the heart. Some of us take people's word at face value. Obviously a mistake for politicians. Especially ones that have murderous fruits on their tree. If I see a thorn, I know it is a thorn bush.

Is it only me who thinks this doesn't make any sense whatsoever?

No, I can't make much of it either. Must have been written in haste. I think the gist of it has to do with a different past.

Gravity is pretty well understood; its forces can be calculated quite accurately and sound models of planetary movement created.

Gravity as it is in this state universe, but not in the future or past.

Have you ever met a satan worshipper?
I always thought it was just an anti-authority phase that pampered kids tend to go through to seek attention.

Don't think so. Unless they hid it.

I'll take my chances thank you.
And here is a few good reasons why:
....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5JtxrR6msg

Sounds fair.

No chance involved.

Afte he banned his original creation from Eden, wiped out all but one family i would have thought he would have a better chance in another corner of the universe.....

No, look at the billions around now. The act will be played out right here as scheduled.

The bible only talks of one planet - this one.
It only talks of one moon, the lesser light.
There is no indication of the stars being thought of as suns or greater lights, which would be consistant with stone-age man's knowledge.
But an all-powerful deity should know better, especially if he created them all.
Shame he didn't tell anyone, he could have explained the pitfalls of astrology at the same time......

The stars are mentioned, and the moon. The ancients considered almost any light in the night sky a star. But there is an added depth to stars modern stoned age men do not know. That is because we only are aware of the present temporary physical stars. They actually have influence on men, and other significances than we know. So, what we call a star is merely a limited and temporary classification.