The God Contention

You say god cannot lie? He said that Adam and Eve would die if they ate from the 'Tree'.. yet they did not die. He said nothing about sin, he said that they would die.

Printable Version

CHRISTIAN View

Genesis 2:16-17 (NASB)
The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

At first glance, it is difficult to see how this was true, according to the Genesis narrative. After all, the day that Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree, they didn't fall down dead. Instead, Genesis tells us that they continued to live and had many children afterwards.

However, with any ancient, translated text it is important to remember that the modern English translation never does perfect justice to the original. In this case, the original was written in ancient Hebrew, not modern English.

Before we jump to conclusions, surely it would seem odd that the individual who put Genesis together would portray his God in such a way as to be completely wrong about something such as this, and provide no commentary whatsoever on the situation... no justification or explanation as to why His God made such an error. It seems far more probable that what was meant by the author is for some reason lost in the translation.

The New American Standard Bible (NASB), the version quoted above, is about as close to a literal word-for-word translation of the Bible to modern American English as we can currently find. Most of the time, this is a good method of translating for study purposes, but many people find the NASB a bit less flowing and more difficult to read than a thought-for-thought version like the New Living Translation (NLT).

Imagine trying to translate the following statement into a foreign language:

"That was a piece of cake -- I could do it in my sleep."

A word-for-word translation would tend to render each word literally, telling readers that the speaker's piece of cake could be done in his sleep, a statement that would have absolutely no coherent meaning in any other culture or language.

A thought-for-thought translation would be more likely to take the meaning of the statement, rather than the exact words, and render that meaning in the words and context of the receptor language. It would probably come out kind of like the following:

"That was so easy -- I could do it in my sleep."

Indeed, when we read the New Living Translation (NLT) version of the same scriptures:

But the LORD God warned him, "You may freely eat the fruit of every tree in the garden -- except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die."

This version certainly makes a lot more sense given the rest of the Genesis narrative, but is it really a legitimate translation of the text? Based on my research, it appears as though the Hebrew can carry the meaning:

"...in that day, your death will be sure."

In other words, it seems to me that the text has God saying that Adam and Eve guaranteed their own deaths on the day that they ate from the tree, and not that God is saying that they would actually fall down dead on that very day.

More on Genesis 2:17

Printable Version

MUSLIM View

I can only assume you are speaking about the Biblical account of the creation story, because in the Qur'an He told them that if they ate from the tree they would be wrongdoers (2:35). After eating from the tree, they were expelled from Paradise and told that Earth would be their dwelling place for a time (2:36). Thereafter, God forgave them of their sin (2:37).

Perhaps what is intended from the passage you read was that they would be mortal, instead of living in Paradise forever.

Comments

Theseus writes:
"...because in the Qur'an He told them that if they ate from the tree they would be wrongdoers (2:35)"

But Shaheed, that can't be actually true because before eating the fruit of the tree, they acted out a wrongdoing ALREADY in '''choosing''' to rebel against God. The 'to make a choice' precedes the 'acting out' thereof, and I argue that having intent or resolution to transgress is a transgression in itself, and therefore Eve and Adam had sinned/betrayed God before eating of the fruit - that is, they were wrong-doer's prior to the fruit's ingestion.

How do we work around this?
Gabriel Yirak writes:
Dear Timothy,

I have been reading quite a few of your answers and I wanted to tell you that I enjoy your analogies. Nothing constructive; just a compliment.
Timothy McCabe writes:
Thanks Gabriel! God bless you!
Moe writes:
Theseus you bring up a very good point. Shaheed did his best, but God's actual book is in the original Arabic. The verse brother Shaheed quoted is a *translation* of the Quran. The actual word in the Quran is dhalimeen. Dhalimeen, like almost every arabic word can mean multiple things, but you have to choose the right one(s), because thats a fundamental of comparative religions. Dhalimeen can mean wrongdoers, but it can also mean one who burdens themselves. See the actual story of Adam is that he didn't sin. All Prophets, Islamically, are infallible. Not ABSOLUTELY infallible, that's God. But relative to other human beings they have more knowledge so they choose to avoid the wrong, making them sinless, making them infallible. We see in Baqara 2:30 God says to the Angels (BEFORE Adam was created) "I am going to make a vicegerent on EARTH. Meaning God's command is that man ill be on Earth, so no matter what he does (eat from said tree, or not, the decree is he will be on earth. period.)
Moe writes:
Ergo, when you OBEY the decree of God, that is always good, never bad. Therefore Adam eating from the tree was always a good thing. SECOND same verse 30 God says on Earth meaning there was no falling from paradise, it was just an earthly garden with special protections so Adam would be oblivious to his sexuality, much like a child until hitting puberty. God ADVISES Adam to stay away from the tree (tree is not bad, if the tree of knowledge is bad, God doesn't want us getting knowledge, which means all attempts at knowledge are damned like God damned Adam, Eve, and all humans..oops thats christianity, back to Islam) God advises Adam to stay away as long as possible from this tree, because once Adam eats, then sexuality is discovered, and the test begins. So when God said advisingly, do not approach this tree, because if you do you will burden yourself, he did not say if you do (obey me) you will be a wrongdoer. Which is counterintuitive since God is all good. Anyway...later on you see
Moe writes:
that Adam (supposedly) asks for forgiveness. He says the same arabic root word dhalamtu. (I have "burdened myself", NOT "sinned") When he says the Arabic word "taghfir" which CAN but does NOT have to mean forgive, it can also mean PROTECT. The ACTUAL CORRECT translation of what the Arabic Quran says is "O Our Lord, we have burdened ourselves (with this life) and if you do not protect us, we will not be of the successful ones. If you want proof that this word taghfir does NOT mean forgive, then I urge you to open up Sura Fath the 48th chapter Verse 2 where it says: God will PROTECT you (Muhammad) of allegations made in the past and future. If it meant forgive, then how can God forgive something in the future? it's like Him making me pay for next weeks prayers. But I haven't experienced that time, hence I am unaccountable. I also urge you to look up Sura nasr Chapter 110. The last verse uses the same word. And hits the point home beautifully. "When you see people entering the religin of
Moe writes:
Allah in multitudes, and the great victory comes about (paraphrasing) then praise your Lord, and ask for (forgiveness??) PROTECTION. Meaning without asking God for his aid and PROTECTION, victory/success is impossible. Adam, as an infallible Prophet knew this, hence in his prayer he asked for protection so that he, his wife, and all his progeny could have victory in this test of life. IF he was asking for FORGIVENESS, for a SIN, which was LEGISLATIVELY a command of God, not advice..then I bring the following argument: The Quran says God accepted the prayer. if it was forgiveness, and God forgave Adam, he should've gone back to that protected state. However he doesn't, neither do he or his wife ever ask for it. Hence proving once and for all that Adam (or any prophet for that matter) NEVER sinned. Also, logically, why would God EXPOSE his representatives in the SAME BOOK?? It's like sending an ambassador to another country and then sending documents that make him look like an idiot.
Moe writes:
Interestingly enough, if Adam never sinned (WHICH in all reality he didn't) then there's no original sin. And if there's no original sin, then there's no need for the *ahem* "vicarious atonement of Jesus christ" which is fancy fluff, for Jesus HAD to die. Not anymore, if Adam never sinned. And therefore by 1 Corinthians 15:17...the Christian faith is once again proven to be in vain. i.e. false.
Moe writes:
Or if you don't want to read all of that, you may watch two lectures, which explain it INFINITELY better than I do. found here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAUj2hwEa_I

and here(part 2):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0bYB6pb_2s&feature=related

if you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask, I'll try my best.
Webmaster writes:
Moe,

If you are interested or know someone who may be, please check this out:

http://www.godcontention.org/apply.php
\__/\__/ writes:
The Islamic answers are damn impressive. In this and other topics. But for me the facts of existence are far more easily accounted for by the absence of a guiding intelligence.
DH writes:
Moe, I read through your response and what had me scratching my head is that your wrote " God's actual book is in the original Arabic". If im correct, the old testatment of the Bible or written Torah is written in Hebrew except for Ezra and Daniel which were written in Aramaic. Your explanation started from a transalation of what you call orginal Arabic translation. Unless Hebrew is orginal Arabic, it seems as if you tried to create smoke and mirrors to prove your point.
Greg writes:
They did die... not immediate death but due to sin the human life ends.
Chad writes:
I appreciate the scholarship on both sides, however I felt compelled to question Moe's attempt to point out the view that Adam never sinned. Even if you want to translate the Arabic as wrongdoer as opposed to sinner, the context is still the same. The argument could easily be made that the translators of Genesis could have done likewise, but because they operated on the premise of understand that the punishment for sin or wrongdoing is death, it's a simple conclusion to draw. Whether you choose to translate from Arabic in the Qu'ran, Greek or Hebrew for the Old testament, or even English today, the linguistical arguments can often become too involved. Remember the Pharasees? Sometimes we forget that it isn't about the word choices, it's about the motive of the heart. Where do your intentions come from? Your own or God? Whether you're an everyday man, or a prophet from Islam, sin, and the consequence of it, is still the same whether you choose to do it or not.
Comment on this topic

More Questions

By what criteria do you attribute veracity to your faith's sacred text(s,) and thus the basis of that faith? Is that criteria objective?
Answers: Atheist, Christian
(25 Comments)
Given that evolution is a fact and that the evidence for it is incontrovertible, I find it very difficult to understand how religious people, mostly Christians, can deny it. Can you enlighten me?
Answers: Christian, Atheist
(69 Comments)
What is your standard of truth? How do you determine what is true?
Answers: Atheist, Christian
(114 Comments)
Did Jesus preach non-violent submission?
Answers: Atheist, Christian
(36 Comments)
Why does God require an argument to defend it, unlike something obvious like gravity for example?
Answers: Muslim, Christian
(37 Comments)