From: "Scott McAliley" <scottanderin1 AT hotmail.com>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] Dying, you will die Gen 2:17
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 23:29:53 -0500
I was reading through some archives addressing the infinitive absolute in
Genesis 2:17, trying to find some answers to questions that only Hebrew
students and experts could answer(I am neither of these, by the way). And I
am hoping that someone can give me some insight. But before I ask my
questions, I may can offer some insight regarding the larger question that
much of that thread seemed to evolve into. There was a lot of speculation
over how God could say that in the day they ate of the tree of knowledge of
good and evil, dying, they would die, since they didn't physically die that
day. But were Adam and Eve not living and dying simultaneously as we all
are? If they were already immortal, as so many people claim we innately
are, then the tree of life that God plainly said could make them live
forever would have no value to them at all if they indeed were already going
to live forever anyway. And as far as we know, it was on the same day that
they sinned that they were barred from the only thing that would have given
them eternal life, therefore, in the day they sinned, already dying, they
died in another sense, losing personal access to the tree of life. So my
theory is that they were already dying, but with the opportunity, by their
own effort in reaching out their hand, taking, and eating from the tree of
life, to have eternal life. But the death sentence was fulfilled perfectly,
and even on that very day, by their banishment. Does the Hebrew support
this theory? I also see the slaying of a beast and covering the nakedness
of Adam and Eve as a foreshadowing of Christ's death on the cross. So the
banishment seems to have more to do with them losing the ability to save
their own souls, than it does eternal death, because God provided the
provision(the covering) before He banished them, and because the tree of
life was only guarded, not chopped down. The tree appears again in the very
last chapter of the Bible, when Christ says that He will give to eat from
it, to those who persevere. All of this causes a serious problem for
Christians who try to maintain that the banishment from the garden
represents eternal damnation in the form of separation from God. Most of
these same Christians believe, as I do, that the covering of skins
represents our salvation through Christ' death. But you can't have both,
because you would have their salvation preceding their damnation. The
banishment can only have to do with the fact that we cannot save ourselves
from death. Only God can do it. And this seems to be supported even more
because we don't just read, "lest they eat of it". We read, "lest they
reach out their hand, and eat of it". This seems to have to do with human
effort. And the entire message of the Bible is that we are insufficient to
save ourselves, and God wants us totally reliant on Him.
It is also commonly taught that their sin ruptured their relationship
with God. How can we claim that? There is not one reference of Adam or Eve
communicating to God before sin. And there is no picture of worship either.
The relationship actually seems pretty bland. But after they sin, then God
graciously comes to them, chastens them(a proof of love according to the New
Testament), then graciously covers their shame. They could have rejected
the covering God offered and tried to maintain their own feeble coverings,
as many do. And this seems to parralel how we still today have the choice
of accepting God's covering for our sin, Jesus death on the cross, or not.
Sorry so long there. My question is: Could the infinitive absolute be
referencing either of the following?...1) That they were physically dying
and there was nothing that could change that, but that their soul, which
would have been saved by eating of the tree of life, will now die as well if
they eat th tree of knowledge of good and evil or 2)That their body and
soul were always headed for death from the point of their creation, but that
they had the opportunity to save both by eating of the tree of life, but
would lose that opportunity if they sinned. My next question is: Does
anyone find any significance in the fact that when Eve was telling the
serpent what God had said, she only used one tense of die, but then the
serpent uses both, as God had? And can someone tell me which tense Eve
used? And last question: When the serpent gives his response, the literal
version I found translates it as, "dying, you will not die", but when I look
at the Hebrew, the negation term precedes both forms of die. Is this just
how Hebrew works? Why is the term for negation in between the "dies" in the
literal translation? I would appreciate any help with this.