Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: Gen 2:17: Dying thou shalt die

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Liz Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>
  • To: "Jason Hare" <parousia_occ AT yahoo.com>, "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Gen 2:17: Dying thou shalt die
  • Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 08:44:10 -0400


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Hare [mailto:parousia_occ AT yahoo.com]

> Liz,
>
> I have to say that I have never noticed that before (about YHWH
> kicking man
> out with the express purpose of keeping him from becoming immortal). That
> is, however, what the text says. It might be interesting just to throw
> those couple of verses on this mail for reference sake.

Yes, this is what the text says. It indicates that he was mortal all along.
Only by eating from the tree of Life would he gain immortality.

>
> "And the LORD God said, 'The man has 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 the LORD God
> banished him from
> the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been
> taken." (Gen.
> 3:22 & 23, NIV)
>
> Interestingly enough, the paradigm fits: God made man in his
> image, yet with
> two seeming differences. The first was that man was ignorant of good and
> evil. The second was that man was mortal. So, if the ignorance
> of good and
> evil were to be filled in with that knowledge, there would only be one
> separating factor between God and man: immortality. Therefore,
> in order to
> keep the breach, God orders that man should be removed from access to that
> tree and, therefore, man is locked in between where he was and who God is.

By George, I think he's got it!!!!
>
> I find it interesting what you have said and the fact that you have taken
> this issue as another indication of the non-literalness of the
> text. I have
> recently been doing study in the area of inerrancy and have come to the
> point of NOT holding that doctrine any longer (mainly by
> comparing parallels
> and theological contradictions [oops... I mean "paradoxes"],
> etc.).

My goodness, Jason. I have seen you grow up before my
very eyes. But I think this is what all of us go through when
we start taking the text seriously. Taking the text seriously
means reading what is actually written, and not what our theology
says *ought* to be written. When we do that we are forced to
confront not only the text but our whole belief system, and often
the very core of our identity.

Best,
Liz

I would
> be interested in hearing some more from you offline as to your opinions on
> the rest of the book of Genesis and, perhaps, for the rest of the
> hagiographa.
>
> Jason Hare (parousia_occ AT yahoo.com)
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
>
> Do You Yahoo!?
>
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: lizfried AT umich.edu
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page