Was Adam created immortal?

by Mr Bean 27 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  onacruse

  Another way to put the question: Was Adam created to die?

  1) If yes, then why the ransom?

  2) If no, was his life to be:

  a) Immortal? The Greek word athanatos ("immortal") nowhere occurs in the LXX, nor is the concept anywhere to be found explicitly stated in the OT;

  b) Everlasting? Neither the Greek (eis ton aiona, "into the ages") or Hebrew (olahm) used at Gen 3:22 inherently contain the thought of "infinite duration," much less "irrevocable duration."

  As far as what eating of the "tree of life" may have symbolized, Poole remarks:

  lest he take also of the tree of life, as he did take of the tree of knowledge, and thereby profane that sacrament of eternal life, and fondly persuade himself that he shall live for ever. This is another scoff or irony, whereby God upbraideth mans presumption, and those vain hopes wherewith he did still feed himself.

  Eating of the "tree of knowledge" added nothing intrinsic to Adam and Eve, and similarly eating of the "tree of life" would have added nothing.

  Perhaps, then, the real point of the story is: Arrogant self-delusion is the surest way to a short and miserable life.

  Nothing is so difficult as not deceiving oneself.
  Ludwig Wittgenstein

  Craig
• 

  JosephMalik

  1. Why do according to the Bible Jesus Christ is the only being, apart from Jehovah who has immortality ?

  Ginosko,

  The only human being is the correct thought. Christ is the human term for the Word our creator. That the Word was immortal before becoming flesh is simply understood. We can say the same thing for angels (non-humans). But after becoming human and mortal Jesus alone gained immortality for us. This is the immortality that He will pass on to all restored to life or changed. No one can simply walk into the kingdom as the Watchtower teaches and continue to live in it. This is another Watchtower lie and a big one at that for which they have no verse. Everyone must die or be changed.

  2. Why angels aren't qualified to obtain immortality ?

  Who says they are not already immortal? After all the ones that sinned had to be controlled (not the ones that did not sin) then will have to be deliberately executed after the 1000 years ends. So again this is a Watchtower teaching that finds no scriptural support. Does a biblical author have to write down the angels are immortal for us to have proof when we know they have been around for thousands of years and longer? Silly stuff really. The word Immortal only appears about six times in the text anyway? Mostly for our benefit under the New Covenant because this is what Christ won for us all.

  3. So many eons and sacrifices had to pass so the Word of John 1:1 qualifies immortality and that it seems so easy for Adam to obtain immortality eating only from a figurative tree in the garden?

  This is the reason why Watchtower witnesses will never understand scripture. Their doctrine is so twisted it will never lead them to the truth. Yet they have gotten away with their lies for a long time.

  Joseph
• 

  JosephMalik

  Another way to put the question: Was Adam created to die?

  Onacruse,

  Not a good question. We should understand that mankind was something new, created in Gods image and likeness the scriptures say with dominion over other life forms.

  Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

  And like these other life forms man was also mortal. But arrangements for mans continued existence were such that after a suitable period of testing (not unlike the final test for some after the 1000 years) immortality would be imparted into such humans depicted by the tree of life that grew in the garden. It is not the trees fruit chemically that mattered but what it represented for mans continued existence. The actual immortality would be imparted to man that attained it by God in much the same way that it was given to Jesus at His transfiguration.

  Onacruse said: b) Everlasting? Neither the Greek (eis ton aiona, "into the ages") or Hebrew (olahm) used at Gen 3:22 inherently contain the thought of "infinite duration," much less "irrevocable duration."

  Yes and this is another interesting study. Lorene Stanley gave several talks on Aiona, and its various meaning and applications during conferences in the Seattle area. Perhaps this is why the word immortality was finally used by the faith as its real hope in Christ. Cuts right through all the confusion that surrounds the word Aiona.

  Joseph
• 

  Ginosko

  Thanks Joseph. Seems more reasonable than WT teachings.
• 

  onacruse

  Joseph:

  But arrangements for mans continued existence were such that after a suitable period of testing (not unlike the final test for some after the 1000 years) immortality would be imparted into such humans depicted by the tree of life that grew in the garden...The actual immortality would be imparted to man that attained it by God in much the same way that it was given to Jesus at His transfiguration.

  Can you provide a straight-forward Scripture to support this hypothesis? One that applies to the pre-sin state of man?

  Thanks,

  Craig
• 

  heathen

  I am sticking with my original conclusion . The tree of life was in fact a tree that bore fruit for adam and eve . Of course it is a theory and cannot be proven that the fruit had some kind of regenerative effect when eaten that healed the body and kept the ageing process in check but I cannot see why they had to be denied access to it if it was only symbolic to begin with . The Bible uses the term they would live til times indefinite if they continued to eat from it .The term times indefinite does not imply that they would live forever but that time a circumstance would eventually cause their demise such as a mortal wound from an animal or falling and breaking their neck .They were allowed to continue to exist in order for the human race to be populated through out the earth but were not allowed to live beyond a thousand years wich would have put them into the second of one of Gods days of wich was written in the day you eat from the fruit of the koweledge of good and bad you will surely die.The fact that they were intended to be immortal , where no harm whatsoever would befall them, was with the understanding that they would be obedient as to the commandment to not eat from from the tree of the knoweledge of good and bad. That's the way I see it and this concludes my essay .ty
• 

  JosephMalik

  Onacruse,

  I thought I did. What else needs to be said?

  Concerning the tree of life, our Lord attained immortality without eating of it. Resurrected or changed mankind will become immortal without eating of it. So the fruit itself is NOT a factor as some may think. The tree simply was part of a story that teaches pre-sinful man perfect or whatever would not live on indefinitly without intervention and guidance that God would provide to them in due time. In fact such provision was already part of God's plan for mankind. I think all this was already covered.

  Joseph
• 

  heathen

  Malik- If the tree was only somekind of symbol than why are these type of trees again mentioned in revelation 22:2 ? your hypothesis holds no water .
• 

  onacruse

  Joseph, so far you have referenced Gen. 1:26; Matt. 10:28; 17:2; 1 Tim. 6:16; 2 Tim. 1:10.

  None of these speak about Adam's original condition, other than that he was created in the "image" of God and the Word. And even the term "image" has a highly variable subjective meaning. It could, for example, be taken to mean that Adam was, as an image of God, perfect and immortal.

  Everything else you've offered is interpolation and interpretation based on post-sin Scripture.

  My position: Scripture simply does not say whether Adam was created with or without everlasting life or immortality, with or without a transformation pending. For that matter, Scripture doesn't even explicitly state that Adam and Eve were perfect.

  And is there, after all, a problem with therefore simply saying "We don't know?"

  Respectfully,

  Craig
• 

  no one

  The 'tree of life', perfection, and everlasting life stuff has always troubled me.

  If the tree is symbolic, why place a 'flaming sword' to guard it? If the tree is real and has the properties implied by God, this seems to go against his own word. He stated that if man ate of the 'tree of knowledge', man would die. Well, since man ate and since God cannot lie, how could the 'tree of life' possibly do anything that would reverse His sentence of death? There should be no need of guarding the tree if God's word(sentence of death) cannot fail.

  If the only reason man dies is because of sin, why do animals die? They seemed to be dying already in the garden since God uses animal skins to clothe the humans. Why don't angels that have sinned die? Longer life spans? They have to be killed in the end.

  And what about the phrase '...has become like one of us in knowing good and bad...'? If God is the 'only one' who determines what is good and bad for all of his creations, why the word 'us'? Sounds like someone else is able to make their own decisions for themselves.

  Additional thoughts: How do you 'deceive' a perfect person? Why weren't Eve's eyes opened until after Adam ate of the fruit? And, of course, we can get goofy and ask if an animal that happened to eat of the tree of life, would it live indefinitely?