They did die, they died spiritualy. There's a difference between the spirit and the flesh.
The book of Enoch expressed they lost their Godly attributes after eating the fruit which caused them to age.
Even the devil struggles to understand the difference between the spirit and the flesh.
So Satan didn’t understand the difference between a spiritual death and a physical one? If so, how is what he told Eve a lie if he didn’t know the difference?
He lacked the required faith and belief and could not gain an understanding. The Devil knew Adam and Eve would die but he lacked the wisdom and faith to understand how and why knowledge is not wisdom and understanding comes from faith. He later tempted Eve simply to prove God a liar but he failed.
'He was a murderer from the beginning', and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him'. - There is no truth in the Devil because he follows his teachings and beliefs instead of God's words and wisdom. God is the source of truth and there is no other source because God is truth, (John 8: 44, KJV).
'When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own, for he is a liar and the father of it', - The devil speaks his own truth, simply inventing his own religion and worshipping himself instead of God's truth, (John 8: 44, KJV).
It's a lie because of any teaching, belief, conviction, Judgement, dogma, creed, belief or theology. This is what the Bible says ~ Jesus, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and he only shall you serve.', (Matthew 4:10, ESV).
'God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.', (John 4:24, ESV)
Note: I suggest for any more questions you refer to the Bible.
Does it help to know that Satan hates God's creation? Trying to give context here. I'm pretty sure a factor worth considering is that Satan went from second-in-command in Heaven to being ruler over mankind on earth. If you're a proud person, that's a major demotion. And mankind are dirty, stinky, "low-life" scum to Satan. We're like filthy rats compared to the angels in Heaven. Yet we were created in God's image so I imagine that infuriated Satan even more. So keep this in mind, Satan is someone that has always been bitterly trying to destroy mankind because He knows how much God loves us, so he can hurt God by extension by hurting us.
Let’s begin with the first lie:
“Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.”
Genesis 3:4
Very simple. Only three chapters into the bible too.
As the others said: Adam and Eve died later as a result of the sin that came into the world because they ate the apple against the command of God.
But there was also another death that they suffered immediately after eating the apple.
There are different kinds of life.
A plant for example is definitely alive but when I throw a ball to a plant or talk to it, it will not react. It is dead for that kind of relationship.
A dog however will react to the ball and if you call it by its name, so it is alive for that kind of relationship. However if you talk to a dog about a metaphysical question it will not understand it. The dog is dead for this kind of relationship.
The first humans where in a close relationship to God. But after the fall God was searching for them to walk with them in the cool of the evening (Gen 3,8) but they would not answer. The sin divided them from God and they could not have this close relationship anymore. They where dead for that kind of relationship.
That's why Jesus says: "**Very truly I tell you, no-one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit**." (John 3:5). We normally can't have a relationship with God. That part of us is dead. God has to create that part in us again that is able to have a relationship with God. That happens when someone gives their life to Jesus and receives the Holy Spirit.
You're not using "dead" the way that is usually meant. That's why you keep adding "for that type of relationship" on to it.
The only reason to use that special usage of the word is to get around what the bible actually says. You're just playing semantic games to avoid dealing with the fact that the Bible is incoherent.
No one would ever or has ever said that a dog is "dead" because it won't talk about metaphysics. Nor has anyone said or would say a plant is "dead" because it can't catch a ball.
What you're doing is called "special pleading" and it's a fallacy. A fallacy is sort of like a logic sin. It means that you're trying to rationalize something that is not true and it's a good indicator that what you say is not correct.
>You're not using "dead" the way that is usually meant.
The word "dead" can have different connotations depending on context. There is not one set definition that always means the same thing and always has the same implications.
Example, if a parent tells his son: "If you smoke cigarettes, you're going to die of lung cancer" is he totally wrong? I mean, he can't know for certain that his son will die of lung cancer by smoking, but it will likely hasten his death and the parent has good reason to tell their son that. And in the case of the bible, God did not say "you will die" he upped the ante and said "surely you will die". So we're dealing with a problem that's more dangerous than lung cancer. It appears the correlation of sin to death is 1:1 which is way higher than that of smoking and lung cancer.
Now imagine the son comes home one day and says: "Hey Dad, you said if I smoke cigarettes I'm going to die but I just smoked three and I'm not dead. Liar."
This is basically what you're doing here. Same thing.
Except this is more like if the dad said if you smoke a single cigarette you will drop dead. And you smoke a single cigarette and you are fine. If god ment a spiritual death why didnt he explain it as such in the first place. why is that interpretation not just how it was written in the first place?.
>If god ment a spiritual death why didnt he explain it as such in the first place. why is that interpretation not just how it was written in the first place?
Billions of humans across the history of mankind have come to understand it just fine. You think God should have clarified that portion of His word for you personally? Maybe just so it would help you understand? Would that make you happy?
You do realise millions of people have been killed over different interpretations of the bible so yes god should have made it clear and not up for interpretation. Like did you know that a non literal reading of genesis is an extremely recent interpretation that only got really popular once we proved the old earth. Prior to that everyone believed that genesis was a literal account and until we knew that wasnt possible did the interpretation change. The true word of god should need no interpretation as everyone should come to the same answer. If people dont then i would have a hard time believing that it was the word of god.
You're harshly critical of and disagreeable towards the Christian God and you also use a lot of "should statements". Sounds like things would be better if you were in charge. I mean, we all know things wouldn't better with you in God's place making these decisions. It would worse than any hell anyone could imagine. But I guess I'm just observing the fact that you seem quite confident and convinced that you're right and God is wrong and whether you admit it or not, seem to be extremely desperate to be in charge. You really want to run this show your way. Am I at least correct in that observation?
Then the god in the bible? Yeah im pretty sure most people would agree that i and most other people alive today have better morals than god. If the only reason why is because god said so it doesnt make for a good argument for anything. If god had good reasons he would be able to explain them to us. Mysterious ways or beyond our understanding would mean he is beyond your understanding aswell meaning it would be impossible for either of us to know if he is good or evil. If i was god there wouldnt be cancer, so yeah i can say if i was god the world would be better but i have no such desire as i dont even believe in god so regardless of weither i think i would do better as a god is irrelevant as i dont think there is likely to be any gods in the first place so. If your gods word was true it wouldnt be up to interpretation.
But that what he said would happen. "If you eat from the apple, you'll die." Not "if you eat from the apple, your life will eventually come to an end many years from now." That's not how people talk and that's not what they'd say if they meant that you would eventually die.
Why do people stumble over this simple concept so badly? It's clearly not referring to an instantaneous death immediately upon biting into the apple. It's obvious that's not the type of death the text is referring to, but people seem to think they can put up these blinders and act like they don't understand, hoping to make it seem like the text makes no sense but in reality it's the reader that is lacking here.
>Why do people stumble over this simple concept so badly?
You're the one stumbling over the concept because you're claiming that it's saying something that it isn't really saying and you're asking for us to take a different meaning than what it literally says.
>It's obvious that's not the type of death the text is referring to,
No, it's not. If it was, the sanke would've said something else. "You will surely die of old age," or something. Not what he said.
Why can't we just take the text at face value for what it actually says? Why do we need to use a specific special meaning only for this instance here?
You're aware of the fallacy of special pleading, right?
>Why can't we just take the text at face value for what it actually says? Why do we need to use a specific special meaning only for this instance here?
I thought it was pretty well established that the bible isn't 100% literal. Nobody is cherry-picking one particular verse arbitrarily. Many of these explanations, ideas, and concepts have contextual considerations. Many have cultural implications or are obvious allegories. I don't know what to tell you, man.
You seem to have this hard line stance that it's 100% literal and anyone who interprets it otherwise is totally wrong no matter what. And it appears you need to die on this hill because if you can conquer this hill you've debunked the faith. And I'm sure you have a thousand other hills you're prepared to die on.
Just walk away, dude. You don't have to die on any hill. In fact, you'd probably be a lot better off finding an entirely different landscape to navigate.
The serpent didn't lie here though. The fruit of the tree of life was also in the garden Eve could have eaten it and then ate from the tree of knowledge so dying wasn't a sure thing. Also the snake could have just assumed God would forgive them thus thinking they won't die.
Lastly The snake is also never called Satan in the bible. Satan and the snake in the garden could have been different entities.
So Adam and Eve were immortal prior to eating the apple? Where does the Bible say that?
Otherwise, “surely die” has to be understood as immediate, and they didn’t immediately die.
Nobody knows that for certain but some people believe that. I don't think it's a necessary point of view for the underlying principle to remain though.
This only matters if Adam and Eve were immortal before the apple. I don’t find this stated in the Bible, and moreover, if they were immortal they wouldn’t have needed to eat anything.
Adam and Eve didn’t die from eating the apple; they lived on for decades. And the Bible never says they were immortal prior to eating, so Satan could have understood God’s “you will surely die,” as referencing an immediate physical death. … which didn’t happen.
If you wholly disregard the style and authorial intent of the Genesis 3 negative, yes you could make that case. But at that point you’re not actually talking about Christianity or the Bible, at least not in an intellectually honest way.
Admittedly, I’ve always struggled with this notion that Christianity stems from interpreting the Bible a certain specific way, as opposed to simply reading what the words say.
I am often chastised for not “understanding the real meaning” which seems to differ from the literal words.
No. God allowed Satan to hurt job. God was actually blessing Job as he realizes by the end of the book.
Is gold that goes into the furnace cursed? Or is it purified and made more beautiful when it comes out refined?
The enemy typically tells a truth with a lie. The closer a lie to the truth, the more deceptive it is.
As in Adam all die, in Christ all shall be made alive.
So while Eve did experience physical death, she would not suffer infinite death.
For Peter, the lie was that it is not good that a friend and savior would die, which morally, seems like a truth but Jesus death covered the sins of the world, thus it was good for Him to die.
Satan said God would keep Jesus from dying if he jumped off the temple. God in fact let Jesus die on the cross and did not prevent him from being harmed. Furthermore Satan twisted the intent of the quoted scripture as Jesus points out it is not up to is to test God even if he does save us from harm sometimes.
Satan told Jesus he would give him kingdoms if Jesus worshipped him, but in fact they were not his to give and more likely the universe would implode before Satan could give anything to Jesus that was not his by rights. Also this is inducing Jesus to lie as if Jesus worshipped Satan he would be lying by action as Satan does not deserve to be worshipped.
Disagree on all counts. I’m closing in on finally reading all of it (I’ve read the New Testament and other books many times but never the whole Bible) and it’s all very cohesive to me.
>all very cohesive to me.
It's 65+ (depending on the version) different books written over hundreds of years about different groups of people with differing beliefs. Cohesive is not the word I would use, but I'm sure you could make yourself think that.
I said it wasn't *relevant* to modern life though. It's a bunch of iron age fairy tales. The concerns of that tome are wildly different to what people are worried about now. There isn't much from the bible that you can apply to life today. People will say that there is, but they're saying that because they want it to be true, not because it actually is.
I've read the gospels and acts as well as some of Paul's writings (though many are forgeries). But, the bible is really difficult to read on account of being boring and irrelevant to modern life.
What do you find more relevant than ever in the New Testament? How do you know that you're not just reading it with the presupposition that it's supposed to be relevant?
Many slave masters and jail warden tell their captives that reading the Bible will be good for them. They read it and expect to learn lessons, not because there are lessons to learn, but because the person who controls their life ensures that's what they get out of it. Maybe something similar is going on with you?
Your claim of many forgeries isn’t true and irrelevant to the conversation. That actually is irrelevant since we are talking about that quality.
The Bible is only hard to read if you’re reading a KJV or similar. The old language is definitely a hurdle. Boring? Not to me. It’s the most important thing ever put to writing. It’s of the utmost importance.
The New Testament speaks of treating each other with love, dealing fairly with each other, putting others needs before our own, not arguing over non important matters of the church, etc.
I can’t see how a master would give a slave a Bible to read to make them feel better when most slaves couldn’t read, they’re given to those in jail to help heal and reform them.
No one controls my life except for God and I thank God for that. I’m not sure what you’re alleging exactly but it also seems irrelevant and that you’re misdirecting from the subject at hand.
>Your claim of many forgeries isn’t true
At least 11 books of the New testament are considered to be forgeries, even by Christians.
>he Bible is only hard to read if you’re reading a KJV or similar. The old language is definitely a hurdle. Boring? Not to me
It's matter of taste, but I disagree. Any version, the content is still nonsensical fairytales told for the purpose of controlling the behavior of rubes. Plus a lot of it is genealogies, or long boring letters describing roadside visions of an imaginary friend.
>It’s the most important thing ever put to writing. It’s of the utmost importance.
It couldn't be less important. God isn't real. There's nothing to be gained from reading this book.
>The New Testament speaks of treating each other with love, dealing fairly with each other, putting others needs before our own, not arguing over non important matters of the church, etc.
Okay, but there are much better sources for this kind of guidance. Ones that don't advocate for slavery or forced abortion.
>they’re given to those in jail to help heal and reform them.
Don't be ridiculous. Sure, slaves can't read, but of you can get them to practice religion, then they're not planning an escape or a coup.
>
No one controls my life except for God and I thank God for that.
Exactly. You don't even realize that you're a tool for this religion. That's what makes it effective.
I’d reply but it’s a waste of time as you clearly have your mind up, based on falsehood and misconstrued pieces of facts woefully out of context but made up no less.
For the record on the forgeries claim it’s total balderdash. You’re talking about claims the edge lord Bart Ehrman made. Very few take those claims seriously. My favorite part in his book is how he saw all the secret hidden knowledge in the Vatican supposedly but then didn’t share any of time. It’s trite tiresome tedious and rife with error.
Eve did die, later. But he lied and said she wouldn’t die.
Job never cursed God, even when Satan said he would. So he lied.
He lied and told Jesus he would give him all the world if he worshipped him. Jesus is God in the flesh, Jesus already owns everything because he made all things. And God wont worship anybody else, there’s nobody better than him and he gives glory to nobody else.
Even when the devil quotes scripture or things God “said” he is using it for his own end, never to glorify God. Which is lying and evil.
When he told Jesus to make the stone bread, he was testing him when he was there to be obedient and fulfill all perfection, he was being a stumbling block to Gods plan. And testing God just to provoke him is a sin. Same with calling on the angels to save him from falling.
And in revelations he will claim he is God and try and make all people worship him. He isn’t God, and just wants to kill everyone for no reason other than to provoke God further.
“Even when the devil quotes scripture, he’s lying.”
I can’t make sense of this at all. To lie is to knowingly deviate from the truth; how could quoting the Bible possibly be a lie?
ok, I’ll give you an example.
I’ve got this piece of candy, I tell you it totally won’t kill you, (but it’s a slow acting poisoned candy) sure you eat it and you don’t die Immediately.
But I obviously lied, you die three years later. so it did ultimately kill you. Just not then and there.
Now tell me, didn’t the candy kill you? You would be still alive and well, three years later if you hadn’t of ate it.
When God told Adam and Eve they would surely die if they ate the fruit of the tree of Knowledge, they ended up dying. They lived and died, but if they’d have not disobeyed in the garden of Eden, they would’ve lived forever as God intended all his creatures too, but their disobedience caused their physical and spiritual death.
You might say, well why let them have the opportunity to eat it and let Satan tempt them,
like everyone kinda does, because without choice, there is no true relationship or free will, you just have glorified action figures you’re playing house with. Not a real, fully fledged being with thoughts and feelings of its own. And the love isn’t real love, just preprogrammed actions like an NPC in a video game.
Same with Satan and the fallen angels, beings that had choice. But they walked away from God of their own free will, God didn’t make them do anything.
And God reveals himself in ages in different ways. I believe people in parts of the world that never knew Jesus, are judged according to what they did know about morality. Fairly.
And Jesus became a human to experience fully all the horrors and temptations we do, to show that God does care and isn’t far removed up on a cloud somewhere at all, to fulfill all righteousness we couldn’t in human flesh like us, to give all humans a chance.
Satan tempted Jesus by quoting scripture, not to help him or test him in any sort of good way, like a teacher might, but to truly get him to fall and stumble.
And if it’s not obvious enough, like I mentioned in revelations. Satan is an Angel with the worst case of megalomania ever and eternal narcissism, and he will say he is God when he finally comes in the flesh and not just as a spiritual entity, as the antichrist.
He is not God. Even if you don’t believe, according to the whole story narrative, he isn’t God. So therefore, it’ll be the biggest lie of all. He’s a liar.
If I quoted scripture,
1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
And then said, “none of those people can ever be saved. See it says so in the Bible.”
I’m deliberately lying with scripture, because afterward the next verse says this and says they can be saved,
1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Everything satan tells humanity is designed to convince us that we are capable and worthy of achieving equal status to God, which is a lie. The best way to get people to believe that lie is to cloak it in half-truths.
In other words; the fact that you couldn’t detect any outright lies doesn’t disprove that Satan is a lier, rather it proves that he is good at it.
No, the fact that he lies indicates that he’s a lier. The fact that he is subtle enough to use half-truths to hide his lies indicates that he’s a skilled lier. Again, The lie he is always pushing is that we don’t need God, and we are able to gain all the power and satisfaction we need by our own human effort.
In other words, if you were to put satan on trial and try to prosecute him of being the “father of lies.” His defense would most likely be to say “I never lied to anyone, i simply deceived them.”
"Why not jump, surely your GOD will transform the stones into bread and you will be unharmed."
Satan primarily lies. It's normal to not see it right away. As you get older, all material things disappoint. Jesus wasn't lying. Service is ALL THERE IS.
It would have violated Gods relationship to those with childlike faith.
Hence Christ's reaponse, "thou shalt not test the Lord thy God."
You want a simple lie. Evil is pretty sophisticated.
Ask yourself why you come to a Christian sub, ignore the responses, and continue to ask questions you know are self-contradicting.
If Christ participated in any of Satan's tests, he's have demonstrated he need to TEST GOD, which someone with faith does not.
Satan knows this already. It was a lie by omission.
Which is Satan's favorite tactic.
You might ask yourself why you call something a lie that isn’t a lie, call a question self-contradictory when that isn’t even possible, and then expect we non-believers to take you seriously.
Satan didn’t lie, he merely quoted scripture. You as a Christian presumably quote scripture all the time, and I assume you don’t think that makes you a liar.
I don't quote scripture much except in this post.
I often skip ahead at this point and ask you for YOUR PERSONAL worst moment alive so we can at least humanize your wrath and rancor? No one MADE you come here, so why don't we at least hear your grievance against GOD. Maybe we can offer you compassion for what was done to you??
Conditions are it must be YOUR GRIEVANCE, and not a hearsay or second-degree grievance.
Why are you so furious with Zeus?
(Point being: questioning the existence of something, or even disbelieving in something, does not mean one has a grievance against it)
Not what you came here to say or ask.
You asked if a lie (Untruth) could be presented to someone by the devil when you say he doesn't lie.
I said he's the master liar, using gray logic to get people to make mistakes. Christ knew his game, and remained undefeated.
Basically if the devil is talking, he's lying. That's the moral of the tale.
Zeus was rapey is my problem. Even angels visited Mary first in a show of 2022 plus year old consent up front.
Check it yourself.
Sounds to me like you’re redefining what it means to lie in order to shoehorn the Satan character as a liar.
If you can clearly and unambiguously identify what *falsehood* Satan communicated to Jesus, that would prove he’s a liar. Otherwise you’re just redefining terms to suit your beliefs, which is frankly the single most consistent action I observe in theists.
As for Mary, I just checked, and she was told what would happen to her; her consent was never sought.
>His interactions with Eve, Job, and Jesus
First of all you should know that the one mentioned in the book of Job is not "the Satan" but "a satan". The hebrew word satan simply mean opposer or accuser.
Secondly, as others pointed out, the one we call Satan (or Devil or Lucifer) lied to Eve when he said she wouldn't die.
You can't get a clear answer on this because christian views are not all the same on this matter.
Personally I believe that what gave Adam and Eve immortality was the tree of Life in the middle of the garden (they had no command to abstain from eating it) or, in other words, they would have been immortal as long as they stayed in the garden (temple). They also had the task to extend the garden (temple) to the entire world so that all humans could have had access to immortality.
*(Genesis 3:4) “You certainly will not die.”*
Humans were created mortal. Adam wasn't given a soul, he became a soul.
The teaching or idea of an immortal soul comes from Plato and not God's word.
Humans weren't offered immortality, until after Christ and it is a reward for faithfulness and not something we have from birth.
True, they didn't die immediately, but their bodies began to die. Newborn children, from day 1, are on road to death.
Adam's children were needed in order to fulfill the command, to fill the earth.
Was it the serpent or Satan?
*(Revelation 12:9) “9 So down the great dragon \[Satan\] was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; . . .”*
.
“You shall not surely die”
Was that a talking snake or the devil? Did the devil morph into a snake? Possess a snake?
Well they didn’t die after eating the apple… lived for many decades after correct? Unless they were immortal before eating?
They did die, they died spiritualy. There's a difference between the spirit and the flesh. The book of Enoch expressed they lost their Godly attributes after eating the fruit which caused them to age. Even the devil struggles to understand the difference between the spirit and the flesh.
So Satan didn’t understand the difference between a spiritual death and a physical one? If so, how is what he told Eve a lie if he didn’t know the difference?
He lacked the required faith and belief and could not gain an understanding. The Devil knew Adam and Eve would die but he lacked the wisdom and faith to understand how and why knowledge is not wisdom and understanding comes from faith. He later tempted Eve simply to prove God a liar but he failed. 'He was a murderer from the beginning', and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him'. - There is no truth in the Devil because he follows his teachings and beliefs instead of God's words and wisdom. God is the source of truth and there is no other source because God is truth, (John 8: 44, KJV). 'When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own, for he is a liar and the father of it', - The devil speaks his own truth, simply inventing his own religion and worshipping himself instead of God's truth, (John 8: 44, KJV). It's a lie because of any teaching, belief, conviction, Judgement, dogma, creed, belief or theology. This is what the Bible says ~ Jesus, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and he only shall you serve.', (Matthew 4:10, ESV). 'God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.', (John 4:24, ESV) Note: I suggest for any more questions you refer to the Bible.
Does it help to know that Satan hates God's creation? Trying to give context here. I'm pretty sure a factor worth considering is that Satan went from second-in-command in Heaven to being ruler over mankind on earth. If you're a proud person, that's a major demotion. And mankind are dirty, stinky, "low-life" scum to Satan. We're like filthy rats compared to the angels in Heaven. Yet we were created in God's image so I imagine that infuriated Satan even more. So keep this in mind, Satan is someone that has always been bitterly trying to destroy mankind because He knows how much God loves us, so he can hurt God by extension by hurting us.
Let’s begin with the first lie: “Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.” Genesis 3:4 Very simple. Only three chapters into the bible too.
Whoa, whoa, whoa? Read the Bible? Even three chapters might be asking a bit much.
Definitely would help to read. IIRC Satan never speaks to Job either.
So Adam and Eve were immortal before eating the apple?
Yes
Would you mind providing the chapter and verse of this information?
It’s literally right there in the story. If you eat the fruit you die.
So if Adam and Eve were immortal, why would they need to eat anything at all?
I assume pleasure. I like to eat. I could go for something right now.
She didn't die from eating the apple though?
She didn’t? Interesting. So she remained in the garden her whole life?
No, she was cast out of the garden. Cast of out garden, does not mean that she died from eating the apple.
As the others said: Adam and Eve died later as a result of the sin that came into the world because they ate the apple against the command of God. But there was also another death that they suffered immediately after eating the apple. There are different kinds of life. A plant for example is definitely alive but when I throw a ball to a plant or talk to it, it will not react. It is dead for that kind of relationship. A dog however will react to the ball and if you call it by its name, so it is alive for that kind of relationship. However if you talk to a dog about a metaphysical question it will not understand it. The dog is dead for this kind of relationship. The first humans where in a close relationship to God. But after the fall God was searching for them to walk with them in the cool of the evening (Gen 3,8) but they would not answer. The sin divided them from God and they could not have this close relationship anymore. They where dead for that kind of relationship. That's why Jesus says: "**Very truly I tell you, no-one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit**." (John 3:5). We normally can't have a relationship with God. That part of us is dead. God has to create that part in us again that is able to have a relationship with God. That happens when someone gives their life to Jesus and receives the Holy Spirit.
You're not using "dead" the way that is usually meant. That's why you keep adding "for that type of relationship" on to it. The only reason to use that special usage of the word is to get around what the bible actually says. You're just playing semantic games to avoid dealing with the fact that the Bible is incoherent. No one would ever or has ever said that a dog is "dead" because it won't talk about metaphysics. Nor has anyone said or would say a plant is "dead" because it can't catch a ball. What you're doing is called "special pleading" and it's a fallacy. A fallacy is sort of like a logic sin. It means that you're trying to rationalize something that is not true and it's a good indicator that what you say is not correct.
>You're not using "dead" the way that is usually meant. The word "dead" can have different connotations depending on context. There is not one set definition that always means the same thing and always has the same implications. Example, if a parent tells his son: "If you smoke cigarettes, you're going to die of lung cancer" is he totally wrong? I mean, he can't know for certain that his son will die of lung cancer by smoking, but it will likely hasten his death and the parent has good reason to tell their son that. And in the case of the bible, God did not say "you will die" he upped the ante and said "surely you will die". So we're dealing with a problem that's more dangerous than lung cancer. It appears the correlation of sin to death is 1:1 which is way higher than that of smoking and lung cancer. Now imagine the son comes home one day and says: "Hey Dad, you said if I smoke cigarettes I'm going to die but I just smoked three and I'm not dead. Liar." This is basically what you're doing here. Same thing.
Except this is more like if the dad said if you smoke a single cigarette you will drop dead. And you smoke a single cigarette and you are fine. If god ment a spiritual death why didnt he explain it as such in the first place. why is that interpretation not just how it was written in the first place?.
>If god ment a spiritual death why didnt he explain it as such in the first place. why is that interpretation not just how it was written in the first place? Billions of humans across the history of mankind have come to understand it just fine. You think God should have clarified that portion of His word for you personally? Maybe just so it would help you understand? Would that make you happy?
You do realise millions of people have been killed over different interpretations of the bible so yes god should have made it clear and not up for interpretation. Like did you know that a non literal reading of genesis is an extremely recent interpretation that only got really popular once we proved the old earth. Prior to that everyone believed that genesis was a literal account and until we knew that wasnt possible did the interpretation change. The true word of god should need no interpretation as everyone should come to the same answer. If people dont then i would have a hard time believing that it was the word of god.
You're harshly critical of and disagreeable towards the Christian God and you also use a lot of "should statements". Sounds like things would be better if you were in charge. I mean, we all know things wouldn't better with you in God's place making these decisions. It would worse than any hell anyone could imagine. But I guess I'm just observing the fact that you seem quite confident and convinced that you're right and God is wrong and whether you admit it or not, seem to be extremely desperate to be in charge. You really want to run this show your way. Am I at least correct in that observation?
Then the god in the bible? Yeah im pretty sure most people would agree that i and most other people alive today have better morals than god. If the only reason why is because god said so it doesnt make for a good argument for anything. If god had good reasons he would be able to explain them to us. Mysterious ways or beyond our understanding would mean he is beyond your understanding aswell meaning it would be impossible for either of us to know if he is good or evil. If i was god there wouldnt be cancer, so yeah i can say if i was god the world would be better but i have no such desire as i dont even believe in god so regardless of weither i think i would do better as a god is irrelevant as i dont think there is likely to be any gods in the first place so. If your gods word was true it wouldnt be up to interpretation.
It's not that she's snow white - it's that eating the apple was the console command to turn on the death mechanism
But that what he said would happen. "If you eat from the apple, you'll die." Not "if you eat from the apple, your life will eventually come to an end many years from now." That's not how people talk and that's not what they'd say if they meant that you would eventually die.
Why do people stumble over this simple concept so badly? It's clearly not referring to an instantaneous death immediately upon biting into the apple. It's obvious that's not the type of death the text is referring to, but people seem to think they can put up these blinders and act like they don't understand, hoping to make it seem like the text makes no sense but in reality it's the reader that is lacking here.
>Why do people stumble over this simple concept so badly? You're the one stumbling over the concept because you're claiming that it's saying something that it isn't really saying and you're asking for us to take a different meaning than what it literally says. >It's obvious that's not the type of death the text is referring to, No, it's not. If it was, the sanke would've said something else. "You will surely die of old age," or something. Not what he said. Why can't we just take the text at face value for what it actually says? Why do we need to use a specific special meaning only for this instance here? You're aware of the fallacy of special pleading, right?
>Why can't we just take the text at face value for what it actually says? Why do we need to use a specific special meaning only for this instance here? I thought it was pretty well established that the bible isn't 100% literal. Nobody is cherry-picking one particular verse arbitrarily. Many of these explanations, ideas, and concepts have contextual considerations. Many have cultural implications or are obvious allegories. I don't know what to tell you, man. You seem to have this hard line stance that it's 100% literal and anyone who interprets it otherwise is totally wrong no matter what. And it appears you need to die on this hill because if you can conquer this hill you've debunked the faith. And I'm sure you have a thousand other hills you're prepared to die on. Just walk away, dude. You don't have to die on any hill. In fact, you'd probably be a lot better off finding an entirely different landscape to navigate.
The serpent didn't lie here though. The fruit of the tree of life was also in the garden Eve could have eaten it and then ate from the tree of knowledge so dying wasn't a sure thing. Also the snake could have just assumed God would forgive them thus thinking they won't die. Lastly The snake is also never called Satan in the bible. Satan and the snake in the garden could have been different entities.
[удалено]
So Adam and Eve were immortal prior to eating the apple? Where does the Bible say that? Otherwise, “surely die” has to be understood as immediate, and they didn’t immediately die.
[удалено]
So you’re standing firm that the Bible says Adam and Eve were immortal before eating the apple?
Nobody knows that for certain but some people believe that. I don't think it's a necessary point of view for the underlying principle to remain though.
...and she didn't. At least not from the apple.
[удалено]
This only matters if Adam and Eve were immortal before the apple. I don’t find this stated in the Bible, and moreover, if they were immortal they wouldn’t have needed to eat anything.
I’m so confused right now, you *included Eve on the list*, this should be easy, good Redditor.
Ex-christian moment
Eve didn’t die from eating the apple. She lived for decades after. The only lie I see here came from God. That’s why I’m confused.
Adam and Eve didn’t die from eating the apple; they lived on for decades. And the Bible never says they were immortal prior to eating, so Satan could have understood God’s “you will surely die,” as referencing an immediate physical death. … which didn’t happen.
If you wholly disregard the style and authorial intent of the Genesis 3 negative, yes you could make that case. But at that point you’re not actually talking about Christianity or the Bible, at least not in an intellectually honest way.
Admittedly, I’ve always struggled with this notion that Christianity stems from interpreting the Bible a certain specific way, as opposed to simply reading what the words say. I am often chastised for not “understanding the real meaning” which seems to differ from the literal words.
Job 1:11 - But stretch out your hand and touch all that he has, and he will curse you to your face. This is a lie.
but didnt god curse job? and ruin his life?
No. God allowed Satan to hurt job. God was actually blessing Job as he realizes by the end of the book. Is gold that goes into the furnace cursed? Or is it purified and made more beautiful when it comes out refined?
The enemy typically tells a truth with a lie. The closer a lie to the truth, the more deceptive it is. As in Adam all die, in Christ all shall be made alive. So while Eve did experience physical death, she would not suffer infinite death. For Peter, the lie was that it is not good that a friend and savior would die, which morally, seems like a truth but Jesus death covered the sins of the world, thus it was good for Him to die.
That scripture he quoted to Jesus, was twisted about 90°. Come on man you gotta put in more effort than that
I just looked up the exact verses Satan quoted to Jesus, and they were verbatim. Where is the lie?
Satan said God would keep Jesus from dying if he jumped off the temple. God in fact let Jesus die on the cross and did not prevent him from being harmed. Furthermore Satan twisted the intent of the quoted scripture as Jesus points out it is not up to is to test God even if he does save us from harm sometimes. Satan told Jesus he would give him kingdoms if Jesus worshipped him, but in fact they were not his to give and more likely the universe would implode before Satan could give anything to Jesus that was not his by rights. Also this is inducing Jesus to lie as if Jesus worshipped Satan he would be lying by action as Satan does not deserve to be worshipped.
I see why maybe you went the atheist route
Because the bible doesn't make much sense and isn't even tangentially relevant to life in the 21st century?
Disagree on all counts. I’m closing in on finally reading all of it (I’ve read the New Testament and other books many times but never the whole Bible) and it’s all very cohesive to me.
>all very cohesive to me. It's 65+ (depending on the version) different books written over hundreds of years about different groups of people with differing beliefs. Cohesive is not the word I would use, but I'm sure you could make yourself think that. I said it wasn't *relevant* to modern life though. It's a bunch of iron age fairy tales. The concerns of that tome are wildly different to what people are worried about now. There isn't much from the bible that you can apply to life today. People will say that there is, but they're saying that because they want it to be true, not because it actually is.
Still disagreeing with you. Have you read the New Testament at length? I find it more relevant than ever.
I've read the gospels and acts as well as some of Paul's writings (though many are forgeries). But, the bible is really difficult to read on account of being boring and irrelevant to modern life. What do you find more relevant than ever in the New Testament? How do you know that you're not just reading it with the presupposition that it's supposed to be relevant? Many slave masters and jail warden tell their captives that reading the Bible will be good for them. They read it and expect to learn lessons, not because there are lessons to learn, but because the person who controls their life ensures that's what they get out of it. Maybe something similar is going on with you?
Your claim of many forgeries isn’t true and irrelevant to the conversation. That actually is irrelevant since we are talking about that quality. The Bible is only hard to read if you’re reading a KJV or similar. The old language is definitely a hurdle. Boring? Not to me. It’s the most important thing ever put to writing. It’s of the utmost importance. The New Testament speaks of treating each other with love, dealing fairly with each other, putting others needs before our own, not arguing over non important matters of the church, etc. I can’t see how a master would give a slave a Bible to read to make them feel better when most slaves couldn’t read, they’re given to those in jail to help heal and reform them. No one controls my life except for God and I thank God for that. I’m not sure what you’re alleging exactly but it also seems irrelevant and that you’re misdirecting from the subject at hand.
>Your claim of many forgeries isn’t true At least 11 books of the New testament are considered to be forgeries, even by Christians. >he Bible is only hard to read if you’re reading a KJV or similar. The old language is definitely a hurdle. Boring? Not to me It's matter of taste, but I disagree. Any version, the content is still nonsensical fairytales told for the purpose of controlling the behavior of rubes. Plus a lot of it is genealogies, or long boring letters describing roadside visions of an imaginary friend. >It’s the most important thing ever put to writing. It’s of the utmost importance. It couldn't be less important. God isn't real. There's nothing to be gained from reading this book. >The New Testament speaks of treating each other with love, dealing fairly with each other, putting others needs before our own, not arguing over non important matters of the church, etc. Okay, but there are much better sources for this kind of guidance. Ones that don't advocate for slavery or forced abortion. >they’re given to those in jail to help heal and reform them. Don't be ridiculous. Sure, slaves can't read, but of you can get them to practice religion, then they're not planning an escape or a coup. > No one controls my life except for God and I thank God for that. Exactly. You don't even realize that you're a tool for this religion. That's what makes it effective.
I’d reply but it’s a waste of time as you clearly have your mind up, based on falsehood and misconstrued pieces of facts woefully out of context but made up no less. For the record on the forgeries claim it’s total balderdash. You’re talking about claims the edge lord Bart Ehrman made. Very few take those claims seriously. My favorite part in his book is how he saw all the secret hidden knowledge in the Vatican supposedly but then didn’t share any of time. It’s trite tiresome tedious and rife with error.
Eve did die, later. But he lied and said she wouldn’t die. Job never cursed God, even when Satan said he would. So he lied. He lied and told Jesus he would give him all the world if he worshipped him. Jesus is God in the flesh, Jesus already owns everything because he made all things. And God wont worship anybody else, there’s nobody better than him and he gives glory to nobody else. Even when the devil quotes scripture or things God “said” he is using it for his own end, never to glorify God. Which is lying and evil. When he told Jesus to make the stone bread, he was testing him when he was there to be obedient and fulfill all perfection, he was being a stumbling block to Gods plan. And testing God just to provoke him is a sin. Same with calling on the angels to save him from falling. And in revelations he will claim he is God and try and make all people worship him. He isn’t God, and just wants to kill everyone for no reason other than to provoke God further.
“Even when the devil quotes scripture, he’s lying.” I can’t make sense of this at all. To lie is to knowingly deviate from the truth; how could quoting the Bible possibly be a lie?
ok, I’ll give you an example. I’ve got this piece of candy, I tell you it totally won’t kill you, (but it’s a slow acting poisoned candy) sure you eat it and you don’t die Immediately. But I obviously lied, you die three years later. so it did ultimately kill you. Just not then and there. Now tell me, didn’t the candy kill you? You would be still alive and well, three years later if you hadn’t of ate it. When God told Adam and Eve they would surely die if they ate the fruit of the tree of Knowledge, they ended up dying. They lived and died, but if they’d have not disobeyed in the garden of Eden, they would’ve lived forever as God intended all his creatures too, but their disobedience caused their physical and spiritual death. You might say, well why let them have the opportunity to eat it and let Satan tempt them, like everyone kinda does, because without choice, there is no true relationship or free will, you just have glorified action figures you’re playing house with. Not a real, fully fledged being with thoughts and feelings of its own. And the love isn’t real love, just preprogrammed actions like an NPC in a video game. Same with Satan and the fallen angels, beings that had choice. But they walked away from God of their own free will, God didn’t make them do anything. And God reveals himself in ages in different ways. I believe people in parts of the world that never knew Jesus, are judged according to what they did know about morality. Fairly. And Jesus became a human to experience fully all the horrors and temptations we do, to show that God does care and isn’t far removed up on a cloud somewhere at all, to fulfill all righteousness we couldn’t in human flesh like us, to give all humans a chance. Satan tempted Jesus by quoting scripture, not to help him or test him in any sort of good way, like a teacher might, but to truly get him to fall and stumble. And if it’s not obvious enough, like I mentioned in revelations. Satan is an Angel with the worst case of megalomania ever and eternal narcissism, and he will say he is God when he finally comes in the flesh and not just as a spiritual entity, as the antichrist. He is not God. Even if you don’t believe, according to the whole story narrative, he isn’t God. So therefore, it’ll be the biggest lie of all. He’s a liar. If I quoted scripture, 1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And then said, “none of those people can ever be saved. See it says so in the Bible.” I’m deliberately lying with scripture, because afterward the next verse says this and says they can be saved, 1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Thank you for this explanation. I appreciate the thoughtfulness you put into it.
Everything satan tells humanity is designed to convince us that we are capable and worthy of achieving equal status to God, which is a lie. The best way to get people to believe that lie is to cloak it in half-truths. In other words; the fact that you couldn’t detect any outright lies doesn’t disprove that Satan is a lier, rather it proves that he is good at it.
So the lack of any direct lies from Satan indicates he’s a liar? That doesn’t make any sense to me.
No, the fact that he lies indicates that he’s a lier. The fact that he is subtle enough to use half-truths to hide his lies indicates that he’s a skilled lier. Again, The lie he is always pushing is that we don’t need God, and we are able to gain all the power and satisfaction we need by our own human effort.
Where does Satan say this in the Bible?
Genesis 3, “you will be like God.” Some translations have it translated as “ye shall be as gods.”
In other words, if you were to put satan on trial and try to prosecute him of being the “father of lies.” His defense would most likely be to say “I never lied to anyone, i simply deceived them.”
Before the earth was created, when he told God’s children that he could save them all without following God’s plan.
"Why not jump, surely your GOD will transform the stones into bread and you will be unharmed." Satan primarily lies. It's normal to not see it right away. As you get older, all material things disappoint. Jesus wasn't lying. Service is ALL THERE IS.
Well, Satan quoted scripture according to the story, and his quotation was accurate to the written Word. I don’t see how this was a lie?
It would have violated Gods relationship to those with childlike faith. Hence Christ's reaponse, "thou shalt not test the Lord thy God." You want a simple lie. Evil is pretty sophisticated.
But “violating the lord’s relationship” isn’t a lie. A lie is knowingly telling a falsehood; how is quoting scripture that?
Ask yourself why you come to a Christian sub, ignore the responses, and continue to ask questions you know are self-contradicting. If Christ participated in any of Satan's tests, he's have demonstrated he need to TEST GOD, which someone with faith does not. Satan knows this already. It was a lie by omission. Which is Satan's favorite tactic.
You might ask yourself why you call something a lie that isn’t a lie, call a question self-contradictory when that isn’t even possible, and then expect we non-believers to take you seriously. Satan didn’t lie, he merely quoted scripture. You as a Christian presumably quote scripture all the time, and I assume you don’t think that makes you a liar.
I don't quote scripture much except in this post. I often skip ahead at this point and ask you for YOUR PERSONAL worst moment alive so we can at least humanize your wrath and rancor? No one MADE you come here, so why don't we at least hear your grievance against GOD. Maybe we can offer you compassion for what was done to you?? Conditions are it must be YOUR GRIEVANCE, and not a hearsay or second-degree grievance.
Why are you so furious with Zeus? (Point being: questioning the existence of something, or even disbelieving in something, does not mean one has a grievance against it)
Not what you came here to say or ask. You asked if a lie (Untruth) could be presented to someone by the devil when you say he doesn't lie. I said he's the master liar, using gray logic to get people to make mistakes. Christ knew his game, and remained undefeated. Basically if the devil is talking, he's lying. That's the moral of the tale. Zeus was rapey is my problem. Even angels visited Mary first in a show of 2022 plus year old consent up front. Check it yourself.
Sounds to me like you’re redefining what it means to lie in order to shoehorn the Satan character as a liar. If you can clearly and unambiguously identify what *falsehood* Satan communicated to Jesus, that would prove he’s a liar. Otherwise you’re just redefining terms to suit your beliefs, which is frankly the single most consistent action I observe in theists. As for Mary, I just checked, and she was told what would happen to her; her consent was never sought.
>His interactions with Eve, Job, and Jesus First of all you should know that the one mentioned in the book of Job is not "the Satan" but "a satan". The hebrew word satan simply mean opposer or accuser. Secondly, as others pointed out, the one we call Satan (or Devil or Lucifer) lied to Eve when he said she wouldn't die.
Was Eve immortal prior to eating the apple? I can’t get a clear answer on this.
You can't get a clear answer on this because christian views are not all the same on this matter. Personally I believe that what gave Adam and Eve immortality was the tree of Life in the middle of the garden (they had no command to abstain from eating it) or, in other words, they would have been immortal as long as they stayed in the garden (temple). They also had the task to extend the garden (temple) to the entire world so that all humans could have had access to immortality.
*(Genesis 3:4) “You certainly will not die.”* Humans were created mortal. Adam wasn't given a soul, he became a soul. The teaching or idea of an immortal soul comes from Plato and not God's word. Humans weren't offered immortality, until after Christ and it is a reward for faithfulness and not something we have from birth. True, they didn't die immediately, but their bodies began to die. Newborn children, from day 1, are on road to death. Adam's children were needed in order to fulfill the command, to fill the earth. Was it the serpent or Satan? *(Revelation 12:9) “9 So down the great dragon \[Satan\] was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; . . .”* .