Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>]

Scott McAliley wrote:
>  But from a theological (or at least logical) standpoint, I'm not sure 
> that my theory that Adam and Eve were already dying before sin doesn't 
> still have a little life in it, even if the "dying,die" phrase doesn't 
> add anything to it.  If eating from the tree of life after rebelling 
> would have caused them to go on living forever, then eating of it 
> before sin would have as well.  But it seems apparent that they had 
> not eaten of it, since barring them from it was part of their 
> punishment for sin, and we are told specifically that this was done so 
> they would not reach out their hands, take, eat, and live forever.  
> And what is something that will not live forever, but something that 
> is dying?

HH: The logic does not sway me. Adam and Eve were created very good. 
They were not immortal, but neither were they dying. They were simply 
alive and would continue that way unless they sinned. If they ate from 
the forbidden fruit, they would die. If they didn't eat the forbidden 
fruit, there might be other ways that they could sin and die, but there 
was no other direct commandment given to them. So that command about the 
fruit was their point of testing. As long as they obeyed it, presumably 
they would live, yet with no guarantee of immortality. Apparently they 
needed to seek out immortality through the tree of life, something they 
never did. Perhaps God did not even explain to them the function of the 
tree of life to prior to their disobedience. So they were alive and not 
dying until they broke the commandment, but they could die and so were 
not immortal.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard