The Truth about Hell - but the mainstream fundies can't accept it. and maybe you can't either

what i am looking for is your stance as to why, after Adam and Eve fell/sinned, why is it that God prevented them from living forever.

EDIT:

to pose my question better:

after Adam/Eve fell, and then the ground was cursed, then told that they will return to the dust (they will physically die one day) why THEN did God prevent them from eating of the tree of life?

Genesis 3:17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

20 Adam[c] named his wife Eve,[d] because she would become the mother of all the living.

21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now 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.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

Hi,

By tree of life do you mean the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Here is a snippet from an in-depth article that explains it all very well for those that have an ear that can hear.

Most Christians denominations teach that Adam and Eve were wicked people because they violated God's commandment not to eat the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Yet, that is not what God Himself said. He declared, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil" (Gen. 3:22). God knows the difference between good and evil, but Adam and Eve didn't when they were first created. The reason why God created this earth was to allow us the opportunity to become more like Him and inherit all that He has (Rev.21:7). But in order to achieve this lofty objective it was necessary for man to learn about and distinguish between good and evil. However, the only way to do that is through personal experience.

But man could not do that while he lived in heaven with God, the Father of our spirits, because evil cannot exist there. Furthermore, since God is all good, it is against His character to teach us evil. But without a knowledge of evil, it is not possible for us to fully understand good ... - [link to www.14lds.com]

Let's start by summarizing what led up to this point. Eve, as the last one created, was the least experienced; unlike Adam she had not personally known God to create anything. So Adam could never have been fooled into thinking he could be like God. Yet when the serpent mezmerized Eve (that's the thrust of the word, not merely tricked), Adam, who "heard the voice of his wife" as she spoke to the serpent, DID AND SAID NOTHING. He had already failed to guard against the serpet, and did so willingly and in full control of his faculties.

When God confronts the three parties, he does so in the order of a "chiasm" or mirror pattern: A-B-X-B'-A'. This common ancient rhetorical device was for the purpose of arguing up to a point and then retracing back in reverse order. So by looking for the X, the pivot, we know where the central point lies. And what we see is man-woman-serpent-woman-man.

Adam says "That woman you gave me!", Eve says "the serpent", and the serpent is not asked. God then addresses the serpent first, "Because you have done this". Then he promises a savior, and honors Eve by saying the savior would come through her seed alone. Then he turns to Eve, and he does NOT say "because you have done this", but I'll put in a footnote some details about what he actually said. She is then told that she will make a fateful choice to follow her husband, and when she does, he will rule over her. This is not a command or curse but a prophecy. Finally, God turns to Adam, and begins with "Because you have done this". Adam was made from the dirt, so it is the dirt, the earth, that is cursed. Why? Because Adam did more than simply disobey, he rebelled; he blamed everyone BUT the serpent for what happened. Eve never tempted Adam, never met in secret with the serpent as she is often accused, never blamed God or Adam; she stated the simple truth: she had been hoodwinked into sinning.

So now we have a clue about the Tree of Life. Eve, in spite of her sin, was not ordered out and could have eaten of the Tree to live. Adam, on the other hand, would have to be expelled from the immediate presence of God and prevented from living forever, because the whole earth was now cursed on his account. Mortality came to them both for the sin they both committed, but Adam's additional sin of rebellion added the separation. The key is that this separation from God is the figurative, spiritual separation signifying "the second death". So while Adam represents both kinds of death, Eve signifies the forgiveness and new life God offers, though tragically she did as God predicted: she followed her husband instead of staying with God.

FOOTNOTE: There is reason to dispute the wording of the so-called "curse of Eve". The LXX reads very differently: "A snare has increased your sorrow and your sighing; in despair you shall bring forth children. You will turn toward your husband and he will rule over you". She was indeed "snared"; the serpent laid a trap for her. The word badly rendered "desire" is the Greek word from which we get "apostrophe", which means "to turn back". See [link to godswordtowomen.org] .

Is it fair that the Bible says people can get into heaven by simply believing in Jesus, when there might be some far better people around who might go to hell simply because they didn't believe in him?

This question derives from a misunderstanding. When Jesus said that anyone who believes in him will have eternal life, the implication of his word believe has been lost in many Bible translations; it actually had the connetation of not only believing, but also obeying. The jewish people would have understood that actions would automatically follow from true faith, and it wouldn't be true faith without them. (Though the true meaning of the word believe has been lost in many translations, the principle is spelled out in so many New Testament verses that it doesn't matter.)

From an article called The Law and the Christian from the Tektonics.org website:

"... And now we plagiarize our own work again to explain our meaning, The Semitic Totality Concept means that "a man's thoughts form one totality with their results in action so that 'thoughts' that result in no action are 'vain'." [Dahl, Resurrection of the Body, 60] To put it another way, man does not have a body; man is a body, and what we regard as constituent elements of spirit and body were looked upon by the Hebrews as a fundamental unity. Applied to the role of works following faith, this means that there can be no decision without corresponding action, for the total person will inevitably reflect a choice that is made. ...

Thus, what we would consider separate actions of conversion, confession, and obedience in the form of works would be considered by the Hebrews to be an act in totality. "Both the act and the meaning of the act mattered -- the two formed for the first Christians an indivisible unity." [Flemington, New Testament Doctrine of Baptism, 111] ..."

From an article called Why Didn't God Stop the Process Before it Started, if He Knew of the Massive Amounts of Suffering That Would Befall Many of His Creatures?? by Glenn Miller:

"... 1. The first 'long-term judgment' verse in the Bible:

“And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. (Dan 12.2)

This is the first verse in the bible that refers to post-death, post-resurrection, long-term effects of this life, for those who actively reject God’s goodness. Notice that the 'quality of life' is described as 'disgrace' and 'contempt'--hardly mind-numbing torture terms! If the hell-experience had been understood as the intense suffering commonly attributed to it, then this verse has focused on very minor aspects of that--to the point of being misleading perhaps.

2. The "weeping and gnashing of teeth" passages: ...

As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (matt 13.40)

Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48 When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matt 13.47) ...

But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (matt 24.48ff) ...

There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. (Luke 13.28ff)

The discomfort described here is weeping/sorrow, NOT screaming/pain--contrary to most of the popular images of hell used for this question.

Notice that a few of these passages have the 'darkness' and 'fire' images, but the effects are cast in terms of sorrow ('weeping') and anguish/regret/anger ('gnashing of teeth', cf. Acts 7.54, Ps 37.12). Notice especially that in the Lucan passage the weeping occurs "when they see" their own exclusion--it is due to the separation issue, not some torture or pain. ...

Hell is thought by many to be eternal. But an examination of the original Greek words apparently sheds a new light on it, and according to some, it turns out that hell is a process of punishment meant to refine and correct faults, to bring people to feel sorrow for their past behaviour so they sincerely seek forgiveness and wish to change their ways, at which point, they can be allowed into heaven.

From an article called Is It All GREEK to You? by brad edwards:

"... While on the topic of "FIRE," let's consider another strong passage from Revelation.

REV 14:10"...he will be tormented with burning SULFUR in the PRESENCE of the holy angels and the Lamb"

In this verse we see the word "SULFUR" used for "tormenting" (punishing) those who follow the Beast. Also note that this is done in the PRESENCE of Jesus and not in some subterranean fire pit away from God. It is this PRESENSE of our holy God that causes their pain to be sure. So what is SULFUR? Well, in some Bibles it is translated "brimstone," but the Greek word here is "THEION" which can also be translated DIVINE as in something from God. Places that lightning touched were called "theia" and left a sulfurous smell. Also sulfur was used in purification ceremonies in that day by some outside of Judea. The real key here is that THEION is derived from THEOS which is GOD! Yes, THEOS is God in Greek and the word THEION comes directly from this Source.

Consider this passage from Acts:

Act 17:29 "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the DIVINE Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man."

The word translated here DIVINE is THEION which has been translated sulfur in other passages like in Revelation. The lake of Fire has a direct connection to the Divine because it comes from God. Not only is this a Divine Fire, but it is one that PURIFIES whatever it comes in contact with. Are we to suppose that our God and Father has no purpose in this Fire that torments those He created in His image and likeness? All that God does has purpose, we simply can't comprehend it yet. ...

The next word to look at is "AION" and its derivatives- "AIONION" and "AIONIOS." That ugly doctrine of "eternal" hell greatly depends on this word meaning forever. ...

There are many passages I could cite showing that AION or OLAM doesn't mean forever, but concerning an AGE or AGE-LASTING. The many derivatives of AION are relating to an age or of the ages. Aionios is rendered "age-lasting" in better translations. The corrective punishment God uses is only for as long as it takes to bring godly sorrow and repentance. Many literal translations of the Bible have corrected this mistake as to bring back loving harmony to God's word as you will read later in this study. To reiterate, aion means an age- a limited period of time and NOT eternal, forever nor forever and ever. ...

The word for punishment here is "KOLASIS." The meaning is to punish, but for CORRECTIVE purposes and not out of vengeance. God is correcting those nations on His left with "aionion kolasis" which is translated this way in these Bibles:

"And these shall go away into age-abiding CORRECTION" -Rotherham's Emphasized Bible ..."

From an article called Honor and Pain - A Refocus on the Atonement and Eternal Punishment from the Tektonics.org website:

"... The 'logic' of hell in the bible is surprisingly simple: You receive back the treatment/effects you gave other agents (including God and yourself) with some kind of multiplier effect. [The bible is full of images of this reciprocity concept: reaping what you sow, being paid back, suffering loss as you had despoiled others, unkindness for unkindness shown, apathy for apathy rendered, 'eye for an eye', proportional judgement, etc] This is suited as well to what we have said of honor debts and shame as a response. You dishonor God; you receive dishonor in return. Appropriately your required response is to acknowledge your own need -- in effect, giving up your "honor" -- by admitting that you need God's help to pay the debt. ..."

[link to www.broadcaster.org.uk]

Adam was expelled with his wife. The mechanical translation says that the human (Adam) was expelled, his woman was under his rule, and both of them were prevented from returning to the garden.


Eve did not have permission or access to the garden.

this is compelling. i want to understand more.

Adam was expelled with his wife. The mechanical translation says that the human (Adam) was expelled, his woman was under his rule, and both of them were prevented from returning to the garden.


Eve did not have permission or access to the garden.

this is compelling. i want to understand more.

Salt, when you give a short reply like this and just brush off all the work I did to back up my view, it makes me despair of having a worthwhile conversation. So you think God gave the treacherous, wimpy, God-blaming man rule over Eve just for being the victim of deception; you believe God rewarded Adam but blamed Eve, just as a rape victim gets the blame. So nothing I said in my comment above amounts to a hill of beans and I wasted my time.

The Hebrew and Greek, as well as even the English translation you used, all say "the man", and the Hebrew word is specific at that point; that is, no longer is it the generic "adama" but the word "ish" as opposed to "ish'sha" for the woman. Only the man was made from the earth; only the man was driven out; only the man was charged with bringing sin into the world. This is indisputable.

Please don't say you want to understand more when what I've already worked on is simply ignored.

ignored?
i just spent 20 minutes bringing up additional info regarding your post.

in the curse to Eve, it clearly states that her man will have rule over her. am i wrong?

Genesis 3:16 To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

nobody got rewarded for their sin. not sure where you are coming from in that. all three parties were given punishment for their specific role in the matter.

man, i might be sorry i upgraded your account. i thought we could study together in civility.

you seem rather hostile.

Is it fair that the Bible says people can get into heaven by simply believing in Jesus, when there might be some far better people around who might go to hell simply because they didn't believe in him?

This question derives from a misunderstanding. When Jesus said that anyone who believes in him will have eternal life, the implication of his word believe has been lost in many Bible translations; it actually had the connetation of not only believing, but also obeying. The jewish people would have understood that actions would automatically follow from true faith, and it wouldn't be true faith without them. (Though the true meaning of the word believe has been lost in many translations, the principle is spelled out in so many New Testament verses that it doesn't matter.)

From an article called The Law and the Christian from the Tektonics.org website:

"... And now we plagiarize our own work again to explain our meaning, The Semitic Totality Concept means that "a man's thoughts form one totality with their results in action so that 'thoughts' that result in no action are 'vain'." [Dahl, Resurrection of the Body, 60] To put it another way, man does not have a body; man is a body, and what we regard as constituent elements of spirit and body were looked upon by the Hebrews as a fundamental unity. Applied to the role of works following faith, this means that there can be no decision without corresponding action, for the total person will inevitably reflect a choice that is made. ...

Thus, what we would consider separate actions of conversion, confession, and obedience in the form of works would be considered by the Hebrews to be an act in totality. "Both the act and the meaning of the act mattered -- the two formed for the first Christians an indivisible unity." [Flemington, New Testament Doctrine of Baptism, 111] ..."

From an article called Why Didn't God Stop the Process Before it Started, if He Knew of the Massive Amounts of Suffering That Would Befall Many of His Creatures?? by Glenn Miller:

"... 1. The first 'long-term judgment' verse in the Bible:

“And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. (Dan 12.2)

This is the first verse in the bible that refers to post-death, post-resurrection, long-term effects of this life, for those who actively reject God’s goodness. Notice that the 'quality of life' is described as 'disgrace' and 'contempt'--hardly mind-numbing torture terms! If the hell-experience had been understood as the intense suffering commonly attributed to it, then this verse has focused on very minor aspects of that--to the point of being misleading perhaps.

2. The "weeping and gnashing of teeth" passages: ...

As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (matt 13.40)

Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48 When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matt 13.47) ...

But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (matt 24.48ff) ...

There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. (Luke 13.28ff)

The discomfort described here is weeping/sorrow, NOT screaming/pain--contrary to most of the popular images of hell used for this question.

Notice that a few of these passages have the 'darkness' and 'fire' images, but the effects are cast in terms of sorrow ('weeping') and anguish/regret/anger ('gnashing of teeth', cf. Acts 7.54, Ps 37.12). Notice especially that in the Lucan passage the weeping occurs "when they see" their own exclusion--it is due to the separation issue, not some torture or pain. ...

Hell is thought by many to be eternal. But an examination of the original Greek words apparently sheds a new light on it, and according to some, it turns out that hell is a process of punishment meant to refine and correct faults, to bring people to feel sorrow for their past behaviour so they sincerely seek forgiveness and wish to change their ways, at which point, they can be allowed into heaven.

From an article called Is It All GREEK to You? by brad edwards:

"... While on the topic of "FIRE," let's consider another strong passage from Revelation.

REV 14:10"...he will be tormented with burning SULFUR in the PRESENCE of the holy angels and the Lamb"

In this verse we see the word "SULFUR" used for "tormenting" (punishing) those who follow the Beast. Also note that this is done in the PRESENCE of Jesus and not in some subterranean fire pit away from God. It is this PRESENSE of our holy God that causes their pain to be sure. So what is SULFUR? Well, in some Bibles it is translated "brimstone," but the Greek word here is "THEION" which can also be translated DIVINE as in something from God. Places that lightning touched were called "theia" and left a sulfurous smell. Also sulfur was used in purification ceremonies in that day by some outside of Judea. The real key here is that THEION is derived from THEOS which is GOD! Yes, THEOS is God in Greek and the word THEION comes directly from this Source.

Consider this passage from Acts:

Act 17:29 "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the DIVINE Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man."

The word translated here DIVINE is THEION which has been translated sulfur in other passages like in Revelation. The lake of Fire has a direct connection to the Divine because it comes from God. Not only is this a Divine Fire, but it is one that PURIFIES whatever it comes in contact with. Are we to suppose that our God and Father has no purpose in this Fire that torments those He created in His image and likeness? All that God does has purpose, we simply can't comprehend it yet. ...

The next word to look at is "AION" and its derivatives- "AIONION" and "AIONIOS." That ugly doctrine of "eternal" hell greatly depends on this word meaning forever. ...

There are many passages I could cite showing that AION or OLAM doesn't mean forever, but concerning an AGE or AGE-LASTING. The many derivatives of AION are relating to an age or of the ages. Aionios is rendered "age-lasting" in better translations. The corrective punishment God uses is only for as long as it takes to bring godly sorrow and repentance. Many literal translations of the Bible have corrected this mistake as to bring back loving harmony to God's word as you will read later in this study. To reiterate, aion means an age- a limited period of time and NOT eternal, forever nor forever and ever. ...

The word for punishment here is "KOLASIS." The meaning is to punish, but for CORRECTIVE purposes and not out of vengeance. God is correcting those nations on His left with "aionion kolasis" which is translated this way in these Bibles:

"And these shall go away into age-abiding CORRECTION" -Rotherham's Emphasized Bible ..."

From an article called Honor and Pain - A Refocus on the Atonement and Eternal Punishment from the Tektonics.org website:

"... The 'logic' of hell in the bible is surprisingly simple: You receive back the treatment/effects you gave other agents (including God and yourself) with some kind of multiplier effect. [The bible is full of images of this reciprocity concept: reaping what you sow, being paid back, suffering loss as you had despoiled others, unkindness for unkindness shown, apathy for apathy rendered, 'eye for an eye', proportional judgement, etc] This is suited as well to what we have said of honor debts and shame as a response. You dishonor God; you receive dishonor in return. Appropriately your required response is to acknowledge your own need -- in effect, giving up your "honor" -- by admitting that you need God's help to pay the debt. ..."

[link to www.broadcaster.org.uk]

You added the other stuff while I was responding. At any rate, you simply pasted from some unknown (to me) source and it does not make any point against anything I said.

There is no curse on Eve. God said that she would turn to her husband, and he would rule over her. See the cause and effect, the sequence? IF she turned, THEN he would rule over her. It was her choice, not God's edict. This is clearly supported in what I wrote before. I even spent extra time on Gen. 3:16.

You may not realize it, but rewarding Adam is exactly what you're arguing. He gets to rule? She gets punished for being tricked? That's what you argue when you say that Adam was given rule over Eve by God.

As for my alleged hostility, I could easily accuse you of the same. Debates are not garden parties, and especially in a place like GLP, I can't fathom how anything I've said comes within ten miles of "hostile". I really can't. People just take a strong argument as hostile I guess.

But consider the meaning of "study together"; it's a two-way street. I presented what I thought was a thorough answer to your question, and your immediate response was just to assert the opposite. This is not studying together. All I can say is that I try my best.

in the curse to Eve, it clearly states that her man will have rule over her. am i wrong?

Genesis 3:16 To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

i am presenting what i understand in response to what you understand. i am not purposefully opposing you. i am breaking this down so i can understand where you are coming from and maybe you can understand where i am coming from.

Eve was the only one who was not cursed, however, bearing children in pain and having her husband rule over her doesn't sound very pleasant (natural consequence?) In this way, when Adam was expelled, it would seem to make sense that Eve was expected to join him. and, the cherubim would not let either one back in (flaming sword)?

that is a QUESTION that i pose to you. not oppositional defiance.

it's ok if we dont agree on everything.
but, i want to understand more of your thinking on it in the hopes that i learn something and am not missing something my self.

true story. seriously.

Rule defined = the priesthood should be used only in righteousness.


Same way God rules over men.

I did go over that passage re. Eve and her alleged curse. God stated what happened ("a snare has increased your sorrow and your sighing"), the result (bearing children in despair), and a prediction (you'll follow Adam and he will rule over you). Had Eve not followed Adam out of the garden, she would not have suffered despair, been ruled over, or been sorrowful. Everything that was to happen to her was by her "turning" that she would do. This is not a curse by God. Contrast it with God's explicit curses: "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all the animals"... "Because you have done this, cursed is the ground". Where is any of that aimed at Eve? Where is evidence of a curse from God to Eve?

Where also is the evidence that "Eve was expected to join" Adam?

As for the flaming sword, once they left they could not return. This has no bearing on why Eve left as opposed to why Adam left; the important thing is that they left.

So far I've given a link to a detailed article I wrote, a few paragraphs in different words for the same argument at the link, and have asked many questions that so far I haven't seen you respond to in regard to the grammar and vocabulary of the Hebrew and Greek. I guess I just don't know why new questions are introduced when old ones are still on the table. Specifically, what about "ish" and "ish'sha"? What about "turning" as opposed to "desire"? What about Eve being tricked and Adam not, with Adam blaming God Himself for his own sin? Yet I went ahead and addressed the flaming sword question anyway. I'm really trying to be accommodating, honest.

Look, LDS... we don't care about Mormonism here. This is about the Bible and the text of Genesis, being examined according to the normal rules of language and logic. There is no "priesthood" anywhere to be found or hinted at in Genesis 1-3.

from my perspective, i have systematically addressed every single question you have posed. I don't agree on your interpretation of the grammar and vocabulary of the Hebrew and Greek. I do not see any evidence of the "turning" that you speak of, the ish and ish'sha, don't agree there, etc.

i have responded with mechanical translations, scriptures, etc.

you are twisting about as much as you can to support your own idea. i can't find anything that supports it anywhere.

i think the only thing we agree on is that Adam was not tricked.

Christ was mis-characterized to the point of crucifixion.

The "ish/ish'sha" is Hebrew. If you'd like I can find a link to a Hebrew interlinear that shows the English equivalents. The "turning" is Greek, and I can supply a link for that too.

Grammar is not something left to interpretation; it is what it is. If you don't agree, that's fine; but if grammar can be dismissed on no basis but preference, then there's really very little point in discussing this, since we'd just be trading opinions. I was appealing to evidence in the text, rather than simply saying what I felt was right.

The "mechanical" text you provided, as I said, does not contradict anything I have argued, so I don't see answers in it.

Again, if interlinears, grammars, and lexicons are not considered more than opinions, and if appeals to them are deemed "twisting" in such a way that you are not also doing with your "mechanical" content, I see no purpose in continuing.

Salt,

You lived up to your moniker like pouring salt on a wound.

it shall be given thee in the very moment what thou shalt speak and write - [link to www.lds.org]

What does not kill me, makes me stronger.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols, 1888
German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

I've added what was given to my sig line as it too is in the name of our Saviour like unto His restored church, even the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints.

Perhaps you or someone like you will someday choose to see the connection.

Salt,

You lived up to your moniker like pouring salt on a wound.

it shall be given thee in the very moment what thou shalt speak and write - [link to www.lds.org]

What does not kill me, makes me stronger.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols, 1888
German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

I've added what was given to my sig line as it too is in the name of our Saviour like unto His restored church, even the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints.

Perhaps you or someone like you will someday choose to see the connection.

agreed

let me try by getting back to my original questions. these are the areas of your premise that i don't grasp yet.

why do you think Eve was not also banished from the garden?
if she wasn't, then why did she leave?
why do you think that the curse was only physical death and not spiritual death (considering the tree of life was an addition to the returning to the dust curse)?

if you have answered these, i apologize. i still don't get where you are coming from in these.


(btw, to everyone else: the topic of hell has very much to do with what went down in the garden, fyi)

Christ was considered unorthodox in His day too .. how do you define how God rules over men?

The text tells us specifically that "the man" was: made from the earth, driven out, forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life. Eve is never ordered out or told "because you have done this". In fact, she is honored when God tells the serpent that the savior would come from her seed alone; no man involved. For Eve to be banished would require some statement to that effect, or the use of plural pronouns rather than singular, as well as explaining why she who was not formed from the ground should be part of the reason for its curse. All this together convinces me that Eve was not being driven out.

She left because she chose to remain with Adam, rather than in the garden. Adam had spent time without Eve, but Eve had never known a moment without Adam. Tough choice, wouldn't you say?

As with the banishment only of Adam, I'd need something to go on in the text to tell me about spiritual death. This is not to be confused with figurative death; perhaps that is part of the problem here. If something is figurative, it is not literal; for example, the head of a company is not literally a head whose body is a building or group of employees. So Adam died physically (literally) and also figuratively (death being a metaphor for separation), but not spiritually. If he died spiritually, where does it say so? I don't see it anywhere, not even by NT writers looking at this passage.

a while back we were talking about the first and second death. it is my comprehension of these scriptures that the garden situation was the "first death"

and the second death, is what happens at judgment day (for some).

i think you were saying that the first death is when man actually physically dies. and we seemed to agree on the second death?

...an afterthought...

Eve left the garden because her "desire was for her husband and that he would rule over her"

?