MuttleyLaff:
I am pleased to have you intervene in our discussion Sir albeit it is obvious you glaringly failed to see MightySparrow's specified distinction

God is incorporeal, and so are celestial beings aka the angelic hosts of heaven, who by the way are never called nor addressed as heavenly sons of God

I am happy that you are reinforcing my earlier point, where and when I typed that the Holy Spirit is, whole of the spirit, devoted to God and dedicated to the successful work of God. Now God's active force or active power (i.e. the Holy Spirit)

It is from love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control that the Holy Spirit does things that will bring honour and praise to God.

Now, it is described as the "Holy Spirit" like I earlier forwarded because it is the whole of the seven flavouring to the Spirit, lmso. I am sure you are aware that there are seven flavouring to the Spirit, lmso.

"²⁸When Jesus arrived on the other side of the lake, in the region of the Gadarenes,g two men who were possessed by demons met him. They came out of the tombs and were so violent that no one could go through that area.
²⁹They began screaming at him, “Why are you interfering with us, Son of God? Have you come here to torture us before God’s appointed time?”
³⁰There happened to be a large herd of pigs feeding in the distance.
³¹So the demons begged, “If you cast us out, send us into that herd of pigs.”
³²“All right, go!” Jesus commanded them. So the demons came out of the men and entered the pigs, and the whole herd plunged down the steep hillside into the lake and drowned in the water.
³³The herdsmen fled to the nearby town, telling everyone what happened to the demon-possessed men.
³⁴Then the entire town came out to meet Jesus, but they begged him to go away and leave them alone"
- Matthew 8:28-34

Of course, there are spirits, equally with negative influence or there are spirits that exist to perpetuate negative effect(s). As for the case of Matthew 8:28-34, pigs are considered unclean animals and this looking at them, from the least POV, is because they are filthy, hence it makes good and calculating sense for the demons to request that they be evicted and given pass to have habitation in something unclean, since by nature they are unclean spirits anyway

MaxInDHouse:
The highlighted Sir!

Please can you help interpret what Mr Job meant @ Job 38:7 compared to Revelation 22:16

---

---

---

MuttleyLaff:
I reiterate that angels aren't in any sense, sons of God. Period

It wasn't angels, in Genesis 6:2&4, Job 1:6, Job 2:1 or even Job 38:7 that are called sons of God, but it is peculiar human beings that are.

Now if in circa Genesis 6:2&4 there were sons of God and the daughters of men, then there equally would have been daughters of God and the sons of men.

As for Job 38:7, reading the verse contextually, shows it is talking of the creation, where the celestial beings, sun and moon, are the sons of God. The "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon

Do you know that, God, is called the Father of lights? (i.e. Father of the constellation, the sun and the moon)

"Jesus replied,
“You are a respected Jewish teacher, and yet you don’t understand these things?
(i.e. You are the teacher of Israel, and do you not know these things?)"
- John 3:10

MaxInDHouse, lmso, as you can read from my small extract above, taken from an earlier post of mine on another thread, Job 38:7 has no correlation with Revelation 22:16 to compare it with. If tbh, I dont think you are ready yet, to know and accept the truth of Revelation 22:16, lmso.

MightySparrow:
What is the nature of a Spirit

MuttleyLaff:
It is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. The nature of the Spirit is the nature of God. The nature of God, is the nature of the Spirit.

---

---

---

MaxInDHouse:
Sorry to intervene in your discussion Sir!

What you listed is not the nature of all spirits!
Note that some people were insane in Jesus' day and it was as a result of spirit possessing them {Matthew 8:28-34} did you see the negative effect of those spirits on those possessed and the herd of pigs?
So God is a spirit also all his heavenly sons (angels) this angels can favor or harm at will based on their countenance {Luke 1:19-20} but the active force of God only does things that will bring honour and praise to God that's why it is called "Holy Spirit" those attributes you listed up there belongs only to God's active force (Holy Spirit)

I am pleased to have you intervene in our discussion Sir albeit it is obvious you glaringly failed to see MightySparrow's specified distinction

God is incorporeal, and so are celestial beings aka the angelic hosts of heaven, who by the way are never called nor addressed as heavenly sons of God

I am happy that you are reinforcing my earlier point, where and when I typed that the Holy Spirit is, whole of the spirit, devoted to God and dedicated to the successful work of God. Now God's active force or active power (i.e. the Holy Spirit)

It is from love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control that the Holy Spirit does things that will bring honour and praise to God.

Now, it is described as the "Holy Spirit" like I earlier forwarded because it is the whole of the seven flavouring to the Spirit, lmso. I am sure you are aware that there are seven flavouring to the Spirit, lmso.

"²⁸When Jesus arrived on the other side of the lake, in the region of the Gadarenes,g two men who were possessed by demons met him. They came out of the tombs and were so violent that no one could go through that area.
²⁹They began screaming at him, “Why are you interfering with us, Son of God? Have you come here to torture us before God’s appointed time?”
³⁰There happened to be a large herd of pigs feeding in the distance.
³¹So the demons begged, “If you cast us out, send us into that herd of pigs.”
³²“All right, go!” Jesus commanded them. So the demons came out of the men and entered the pigs, and the whole herd plunged down the steep hillside into the lake and drowned in the water.
³³The herdsmen fled to the nearby town, telling everyone what happened to the demon-possessed men.
³⁴Then the entire town came out to meet Jesus, but they begged him to go away and leave them alone"
- Matthew 8:28-34

Of course, there are spirits, equally with negative influence or there are spirits that exist to perpetuate negative effect(s). As for the case of Matthew 8:28-34, pigs are considered unclean animals and this looking at them, from the least POV, is because they are filthy, hence it makes good and calculating sense for the demons to request that they be evicted and given pass to have habitation in something unclean, since by nature they are unclean spirits anyway

MightySparrow:
What is the nature of a Spirit

It is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. The nature of the Spirit is the nature of God. The nature of God, is the nature of the Spirit.

MuttleyLaff:
Feel free to ask questions, instead of slipping to distort what I typed

MightySparrow:
Is there a particular Spirit called The Holy Spirit?

---

---

---

MuttleyLaff:
You need to realise that there is one spirit of God, that comes and reveals itself specifically in distinctive seven flavours, lmso, and so the phrase "Holy Spirit" essentially is indicating the whole of the distinctive spirit flavours, aka wholly spirit lmso. The Holy Spirit is, whole of the spirit devoted to God and dedicated to the successful work of God

There is a particular Spirit called The Holy Spirit. I am sure that you know that the Holy Spirit is part of the Godhead. There are seven particular flavours of the Spirit that as a whole come to be called or be known as the "The Holy Spirit".

MightySparrow:
ok

Feel free to ask questions, instead of slipping to distort what I typed

Sorry PeaceLoveJoy for your post above at 7:44pm being censored. What did you type? I hope its not you picking up mud, trying to sling more mud at me, lmso.

Blabbermouth:
I know the God of Israel has a name, numerous titles and other personal names.

I know the Lord Jesus has a name, numerous titles and many other names.

So I'm asking, does the holy spirit have a name? If so, what is(are) the name(s)?

It might have a personal name, but I am not aware of the what the personal name is. It often is called Comforter, Paraclete, Helper, Spirit of Truth et cetera, but you being addressed here as Blabbermouth doesnt imply that is your personal name, lmso

Emusan:
Jesus said Matthew 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"

If Holy Spirit doesn't have a name, then Jesus would have wrong to baptize in THE NAME of the Holy Spirit.

Please dont tell me that you dont know that Matthew 28:19 is a latter addition/insertion to the Gospel according to Matthew, hmm?

Blabbermouth:
That verse is one of the reasons why I'm interested in knowing that name.

Do you know his name?

I wouldn't let that verse unduly arouse your interest because it is an insertion that isnt in the original text.

No one know knows the personal name of the Holy Spirit, its just as, no one on the Religion forum knows your personal name, we know you as Blabbermouth, but Blabbermouth defo isnt your personal name, lmso. I guess it's a descriptor name you selected to use and be called by because you reckon you are revved up to be doing indiscreet talking on in here, lmso

Emusan:
If you read the scripture very well you'll have familiar with the phrase "The Spirit" used for Holy Spirit in many times.

Besides, Holy Spirit is a name on it's own.

The phrase "Holy Spirit" is a description, it isnt really a personal name

Blabbermouth:
Lol. We both know you are spiritually kidding.
Yhwh is God's name, The Holy One is a title/eulogy.

Jesus is the Lord's name, the savior is a title/office.

The spirit of the holy one is the holy spirit. That's not a name!

Yhwh is not God's personal name. It also is a descriptor. Of course, I am sure you are aware its the four Hebrew alphabets Y, H, W and H, that when vocalised you end up with Yahweh.

Emusan:
This is funny considering that when God disclosed the name to Moses, we read that God says "This will be my name" which means prior to that time, God wasn't using that name.

"God also said to Moses, "Say this to the Israelites:
Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.
This is My name forever; this is how I am to be remembered in every generation.""
- Exodus 3:15

"I am Yahweh, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another or My praise to idols."
- Isaiah 42:8

"even Yahweh, the God of Armies; Yahweh is His name of renown!"
- Hosea 12:5

God disclosed a descriptor name to Moshe aka Moses. Yahweh isnt God personal name, lmso. It is a revealing declaration, that is giving an expression of saying "I Self Exist" or simply "I AM" It also has the sense of saying "I AM that I AM" or "I become that I become" or "I shall be that I shall" et cetera

Of course God has a personal name, but the Bible clearly, on at least three occasions refused to reveal what God's personal name is. The Bible politely gives the reason for not saying what God's personal name is, and the reason for not disclosing the personal name is because the name is wonderful, meaning it is impossible to understand, is not able to be understood and/or it is incomprehensible. Hearing what the name is, will render the hearer, dumbfounded, lost for words and effectively speechless. So the personal name of God is unknown. It is hidden, is a secret and again, it is because its meaning is beyond comprehension and it's a name that works miracles. The closest anyone will get to knowing or feeling what the name is will be through the expressive "I AM that I AM,” descriptor declaration.

I can give more details on Exodus 3:15, if any is interested

Emusan:
At least the fact from the scripture is that The Holy Spirit has a name according to Jesus, if not Jesus will be wrong.

Jesus is a name that means "Salvation is from Yahweh" or "Yahweh saves", while the Saviour is just another descriptor word. I can live with it if you want to settle with calling it a title or office, but though Yahshua Ha Mashiah, aka Jesus Christ, God Incarnate is our Lord, Owner of the Universe and Saviour of the whole wide world, He never used Saviour as a title/office. He often used the title Son of Man instead quite a lot of times, lmso

MightySparrow:
I am trying to understand your post

I appreciate that is what you want to try and do, but please dont give a false and/or misleading account of what I typed nah. It is very clear and unambiguous all what I typed in the post.

sonmvayina:
May this new year bring you peace and less Nairaland drama.
Stay focused on the Torah and everything will be alright.

The Torah and the Old Testament laid the foundation for the New Testament. The Torah is the New Testament concealed, while the New Testament is the Torah and the Old Testament revealed. We use two hands to wash ourselves clean, lmso. Praise God. Alleluia

MightySparrow:
So, in essence, if I get what you're trying to explain is that there's no particular Spirit, known as Holy Spirit.

How do you mean saying that "I am trying to explain that there's no particular Spirit, known as Holy Spirit"? Is that really all you computed in that concise post, hmm?

sonmvayina:
Jesus vs Thanos, who do you think will win. Can we schedule a fight..

DOA
Thanos is a fictional supervillain appearing in American comic books published by Marvel Comics. The character was created by writer-artist Jim Starlin, and made his first appearance in The Invincible.

PeaceLoveJoy:
Now, I understand you. Hmmmm! Dusting you away. What a pity?

You don't understand jackshit and that is why I held my peace at your rant and raving up there. You haven't a foggiest idea and so the reason why I suffered you gladly with a soft landing. I dont owe you any explanation, not especially when my conscience with God is clear. I am sure you aren't aware that I went out of my way to specially open up this thread for Eviana, aka eviana2, aka eviana3 and give her the opportunity to take off what was on her chest, but little did I know that she is well into playing an over developed psychology mind, teasing and withdrawal games.

PeaceLoveJoy I sincerely, truthfully and honestly love you as a brother/sister, so please quit your unjust judging. Biko. I beg una. You seriously have no idea and dont know anything about what you've latched on to.

PeaceLoveJoy:
@MuttleyLaff
I do not understand the christianity practised here. Why do you want to prove yourself right here? I do not expect you to go this far. At times, you need to allow others express themselves and tolerate them. I follow the lady's thread and I am forced to open an account cos I saw she has decided to hold her peace. And she demonstrated maturity better than you. Atheists hardly argue among themselves. Even muslims dont. Why is it that Christians do this? And the strength you use in debating marvels me. I expect you to ask her why she raises alarm at times. For her to have decided to converse with you means a lot. Perhaps she trusts you somehow, but you blew up the chance of ministering to her by attacking her. Christians minister to one another also. I was looking forward to a thread I can learn from, but I am disappointed the way you handled it. When she wrote she held back her questions, I expected you to use wisdom to talk to her. But what you did was wrong. Totally wrong. She is not one of these Pentecostal churches making noises around. There are truths in her messages. Though, she may not know all, but she is knows what she is preaching. I am not happy with you at all.

I wanted to come here and attack you. I wanted to blast you. But at the last moment, I just felt I am not better if I do that. Bro, you need to apologize to her. Apologizing to her doesn't make you a less person. It doesn't make you wrong too. It is the way forward. You can blast each other privately, but when posting messages publicly, let us represent Christ. Look at how she just walked away quietly. She is more of Christ with her action. And really, I am forced to want to listen to her more than you. Action speaks louder than words.

You guys can learn from each other. I am not here to condemn you but show you that you took it took far. Now that you have won the debate which she didnt even participate because she listened to the Holy Spirit not to speak further, what next? Are you happy? And where is your gold medal for winning the debate? Guy, apologize and learn from each other. Are you saying you haven't learn anything from her posts?

[img]https://media1./images/0231ce01bd7fce51b82d143924cb3cfd/tenor.gif[/img]
I love you too back PeaceLoveJoy.
Smh sigh.

jamesid29:
You clearly said, "muth tamuth" indicates the sense and understanding of beginning of dying or sense of gradual or slow death starting). That is an incorrect understanding of the hebrew grammar.

It seems you don't still get the point being made if you're still asking these questions .. But It is well bro.

Brother with all due respect, I make no apology for making that comment. I clearly said what you quoted me saying and even said quite a lot more than that sir.

I clearly see you making your focus on much ado about nothing. My point remains that the Hebrew phrase "muth tamuth" means "to die" where "to" in the "to die" phrase is expressing a direction of death and/or to draw ones last breath (e.g. as like Shimei's case in 1 Kings 2:36-37)

You seem to agree with Petra1 that Genesis 2:17 is emphatically and exclusively speaking of spiritual death and no more death after it. Tut-tut-tut.

1 Kings 2:36-37, to a certain degree, is a mirror image of Genesis 2:17, but notice my context is king cautionary "watch it" plea. Tbh, I think you're better off commenting on "Where Lies The Serpents Deception? Genesis 3" and shedding illuminating light on the question for us all learn from you instead of focusing on my lowly humble submission and saying I have an incorrect understanding of the Hebrew grammar.

jamesid29:
Thanks bro..

I sincerely really did mean it

Blabbermouth:
I know the God of Israel has a name, numerous titles and other personal names.

God's personal name is too potent, too wonderful, too inexplicable, too beyond understanding, too extraordinary, too hard or difficult to understand, for it to be revealed and so God has His personal name to be not known and thus His personal name in a deliberate and intentional way remains a secret, lmso.

Nobody knows God's great powerful, influential revered personal name, and so nobody can whimsically decide to evocate Him with His personal name, like as rubbing a bottle. to summon a genie, lmso

Blabbermouth:
I know the Lord Jesus has a name, numerous titles and many other names.

Yahshua Ha Mashiah, aka Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, our Lord, Owner of the Universe and Saviour of the whole wide world at birth was personally name Yahshua, as an indication that Salvation comes from Yah (i.e. Salvation comes from God, lmso)

Son of Man, inarguably one of the most favourite, if not the most favourite descriptor, our Lord, Owner of the Universe and Saviour of the whole wide world, Yahshua Ha Mashiah, aka Jesus Christ, God Incarnate uses is a title indicating the human being side of Him, and Him actually identifying with us, that He too is a product from a human being, hence He often uses the Son of Man title to remind us, that He is just as human as we are.

Blabbermouth:
So I'm asking, does the holy spirit have a name? If so, what is(are) the name(s)?

MightySparrow:
It depends on what your definittion of name is. Holy Spirit is already a name.

The Holy Spirit has descriptor names. It has names that describes it (e.g. Comforter, Spirit of Truth, Helper et cetera, but there is no known personal name of the Holy Spirit, lmso brothers.

You need to realise that there is one spirit of God, that comes and reveals itself specifically in distinctive seven flavours, lmso, and so the phrase "Holy Spirit" essentially is indicating the whole of the distinctive spirit flavours, aka wholly spirit lmso. The Holy Spirit is, whole of the spirit devoted to God and dedicated to the successful work of God

[img]https://media./images/a03c658bc2283c1673e0dde9984972a8/tenor.gif[/img]

matrix199:
What's the point listening/watching when the ones listened to/watched during the lockdown were full of gibbers.
This Mr. Christopher Oyakhilome is really losing it gradually.

[img]https://media1./images/7c5ce04393bf758a64d2326e7b6a37f7/tenor.gif?itemid=13337992[/img]
I tell you

MuttleyLaff:

---

---

---

"¹⁶And the LORD God commanded him,
“You may eat freely from every tree of the garden,
¹⁷but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil;
for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die."
- Genesis 2:16-17

@petra1, @livingchrist and particularly @EFULEFU1

You should be familiar of this ''You surely will not die!'' ''grain/straw and stick'' or '''chicken/fish and bone'' Genesis 3:4 message to Eve:
Is the Genesis 3:4 message, an absolute truth or a pseudo truth statement?

Since after the fall from grace to grass, and from that moment on, we are born, our mortality (i.e. the state of being subject to death) clock, starts to tick down.

The Hebrew words "muth, muth", used in Genesis 2:17 above, often as equally seen above, is usually translated as "surely die" or literally, as "you will certainly die" when actually, in a Hebraic manner of speaking, it correctly, indicates the sense and understanding of beginning of dying.

"Muth, muth," in fact, conveys a meaning of and gives, an awareness of entered death (i.e. have a sense of gradual or slow death starting), hence why and how, it is, we die by the second, we are in fact, slowly dying. It will interest you to know that, one million cells in your body, die every second. That means in one day, approximately 1.2 kg of cells in your body dies. We surely are dying, unlike not surely die, as what the serpent would want Eve to believe

@EFULEFU1, where lies the serpent's deception in Genesis 3:4-5 &/or 22, is that, the serpent failed to admit that, eating of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, points in the direction of death, (i.e. to die) as that is what "surely die" means.

To die, (i.e. "muth, muth'') is the result, for eating, off the TKGE and so, slowly but surely, Adam and Eve did approach death, unlike the lie fashioned by the crafty serpent and sold to Eve.

@petra1 & @livingchrist, God wasn't explicit, about the kind of death, He was talking off, so petra1 now saying "God was talking about spiritual death" is sheer outright eisegesis with bells on.

Spiritual death, is instantaneous. It occurs immediately, whereas, physical death, though the process has started, it is delayed. It is slow, its dragged out and often is over a long time period, lmso.

Physical death, often continues on, over a long time before eventually one finally once and for all, drops dead or sleep and die, lmso. Adam lived to be 930 years old, before the grim reaper finally caught up and came knocking on his door

---

---

---

jamesid29:
Like I said earlier, the article you are pointing to doesn't agree with your understanding of infinitive absolute when used as an adverb to make emphasis(repetition of words twice).
Here are the statements I'm interacting with:

All this are incorrect statements because that is not what the Hebrew grammar is conveying and that's definitely not what the article you are linking to is saying.
Like I said in my previous post, I am not interacting with your theological conversation. If you don't agree with the fact that they died spiritually that day, that's fine; You just have to come up with the type of death that happened that day(cos obviously they didn't drop dead physically). Or you can alternatively try to exegete that "beyôm" doesn't necessarily mean " in that day" literally and that it could be taken as anyday in the future in which God decides. That's another way of going about it(And that's the way your article went, even though I do not find his arguments convincing as there were a few unexplained positions taken e.g;He takes "beyôm" literally for the spiritual death but not literally for the physical death, but does not give any real reason why the switch up.... But again that's a different conversation & not the one we are having).

What you cannot do though is use the Hebrew grammar in the text to say they entered into a "state of dying", or a state of slow/gradual death, or that it means they will die a slow death(begin the process of deterioration).
That's not what "muth tamuth" means and that's not how infinitive absolutes in that form functions boss.
"Muth tamuth" just means,the certainty of their death is assured but as I pointed out above, you can play around with the "in that day(beyôm)" part and make the claim that it's not meant to be taking literally and God even though He has already decreed the certainty of their death, would in his sovereignty decide which day He would take their life.
But as I also said earlier though, personally I don't buy that line of argument and I believe there are better arguments that are more faithful to the text and explain better how physical death entered into the world. But in all fairness,its also not a bad argument.

And that's what I was bringing to your attention. Not that you were totally wrong with your understanding but that You were conflating the different functions of infinitive absolute. A) Infinitive Absolute used to express certainty of a verbal action ,when paired with a finite verb of the same root(i.e same word repetition but one functioning as an adverb as a way of laying emphasis on the certainty of an action/word)
B) Infinitive absolute used to express progression or continuance of verbal action, when used with the specific root "halowk (הלךְ/going)".

I believe you are not still getting my point,but It's fine bro.
I think I also need to work on my art of rhetoric(part of vision 2021 lol).

Happy New year bro. And may we be here again in good health and joyous peace by this time next year.

Brother I do get your point, but what you dont want to realise is that you are labouring a moot point.

Where did you read or see me, not agreeing to a spiritual death bro, hmm? Did I not type from the onset that, they died a spiritual death with physical death catching up, like 930 years in Adam's case, hmm? Its you reading more into me saying ""You need to become familiar with Hebrew infinitive absolute construct" and revved up to make a meal out of it. You dont know what my understanding of infinitive absolute is because I never gave explanations about it. All I did was give advice to become familiar with it, lmso.

Here, lets cut to the chase. I would love to see your sincere, honest and truthful responses to the below easy peasy lemon squeezy innocent, harmless, straightforward simple three questions:
1/ What kind of death did A&E die in Genesis 2:16-17 and what kind of death, referencing 1 Kings 2:36-37, did Shimei die off?.
2/ What kind of death did Shimei die of, for leaving Jerusalem, huh? Did Shimei die a spiritual death?
3/ If Petra1 says Genesis 2:16-17 denotes a spiritual death because of the "You will not surely die." phrase why because of 1 Kings 2:36-37, isnt spiritual death too applicable to Shimei then.

Happy New year to you bro, your family and all things that's generally yours. May you excel, go above and beyond the limits of your God given grace, power, gift(s), strength and potential(s).

jamesid29:
Probably you didn't get what my post was about.
My post was about how the Hebrew grammar works because you were conflating different concepts,which inevitable skewed your interpretation of the text. I wasn't actually wading much into the theological conversation.

Infinitive absolute is a very flexible non-finite verbal form and it can function as many different things (an adverb, a finite verb, a verbal complement, a noun etc) and all this different forms convey different meanings in the text it is used.
When it is paired with a finite verb of the same root(repetition), it functions as an adverb to lay emphasis on a word or express certainty of verbal action. This is a common usage in the OT and my usage of Gen 37:33 was to show one example of its usage and not to make a theological connection.
As you noted, 1kings 2:37 is another example:
For on the day you go out and cross the brook Kidron, know for certain that you shall die. Your blood shall be on your own head.”
Basically during Solomon's consolidation of power, Shimei's life was spared because of the oath David made to him but there was one condition; He is confined to Jerusalem. If he dares go out of Jerusalem and crosses the brook Kidron, without a doubt, he would be killed and his blood would be on his own hands not on Solomon's. That was what eventually happened. He left Jerusalem, he was caught and was executed.
Here again, dying you would die was making emphasis to express the certainty of an action. If he was caught outside of Jerusalem, he would be executed without a doubt.

Another example would be Gen 2:16: "from-every tree-of the garden eating you may eat". Translated as And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden - ESV; Other modern translations use "freely" here for stylistic reasons and the way English works, but the concept and rendering is the same.
There are many more examples of this way of laying emphasis or expressing certainty in the Hebrew Bible.
You can easily

As for the link you posted. I think you should read it fully to understand the point the man was trying to make. He was expressing two connected thoughts..
His first point is that the "dying you shall die" is used to convey the certainty of their death because thats how the
Hebrew construct work. First he posit that the certainty occured as a spiritual death(separation from God) immediately they eat the fruit as petra1 posited and physical death came later as a result of this.
His point was that we shouldn't take " beyôm (in that very day)" to mean a literal 24hrs day because " beyôm (בְּיוֹם)" can mean an extended period of time. he sighted other passages where the phrase "beyôm " didn't mean a 24hr period. So he is using two concepts to make his point.

Like almost all theologians or scholars, he agrees that the certainty of spiritual death happened the day they earth the fruit. He is definitely not arguing that an infinitive absolute verb form functioning as an emphasis means any other thing than laying emphasis.
This is thean extract from the beginning of the article

The phrase “you shall surely die” can be literally translated from the Hebrew biblical text as “dying you shall die.” In the Hebrew phrase we find the imperfect form of the Hebrew verb (you shall die) with the infinitive absolute form of the same verb (dying). This presence of the infinitive absolute intensifies the meaning of the imperfect verb (hence the usual translation of “you shall surely die”). This grammatical construction is quite common in the Old Testament, not just with this verb but others also, and does indicate (or intensify) the certainty of the action. [/b]The scholarly reference work by Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Conner, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1990), gives many Biblical examples of this,1 and they say that “the precise nuance of intensification [of the verbal meaning] must be discovered from the broader context.”2 [b]Clearly in the context of Genesis 3, Adam and Eve died spiritually instantly—they were separated from God and hid themselves. Their relationship with God was broken.

Then he goes on to argue that physical death came as a result of Adam's sin also but he tries to make the argument that the certainty of the physical death was not time bound and he uses the phrase beyôm to tie it together.
In this part, He is interacting with the Young earth , old earth debate of whether there was already physical death before humanity's sin. If you are an old earth creationist, you have to agree that there was already physical death on earth before Adam's sin but if you are an young earth creationist, physical death on earth was as a result of Adam's sin.
Maybe you should try reading the article fully to try understanding what arguments are really being made.

Personally, I don't really buy his arguments, as I believe other people have been able to tie together this tension of where the origin of physical death starts alot better and that is more faithful to the text.
But like I said, I am not really interacting with the theological conversation but just bringing your attention to your misunderstanding of the Hebrew grammar.

In the Hebrew phrase we find the imperfect form of the Hebrew verb (you shall die) with the infinitive absolute form of the same verb (dying). [b]This presence of the infinitive absolute intensifies the meaning of the imperfect verb (hence the usual translation of “you shall surely die”). This grammatical construction is quite common in the Old Testament, not just with this verb but others also, and does indicate (or intensify) the certainty of the action. --- This is a direct quotation from the link you posted and how the article author himself defines how an infinitive absolute verb form paired with a finite verb form of the same root function.

Again pls read the article in full so you don't misrepresent what the author is conveying.

"So you see, just as death came into the world through a man,
now the resurrection from the dead has begun through another man."
- 1 Corinthians 15:21

I defo did get what your post was about, lmso. KMFT. You need to, in thorough manner slowly re-read Dr. Terry Mortenson's article instead of jumping on thread, feet first and throwing wild crazy punches.

You must be feigning shortsightedness, so that you wouldnt have to acknowledge how Dr. Terry Mortenson brought his article to an end with the below excerpt

"So, from all this we conclude that, the construction “dying you shall die” and beyôm in Genesis 2:17 do not require us, to conclude that God was warning that, “the very day you eat from the tree is the exact same day that you will die physically.” "

Now, Mr-big-plank-of-wood-in-your-own-eyes, please summarily write in one sentence, stretch it, to two, if you want, exactly what Dr. Terry Mortenson, the writer penned on answersingenesis.org, then equally summarise in one sentence capturing all my points, what I posted or what the real points of my POV are.

I dont know what came over you, that gave you the impression I didnt from start to end read Dr. Terry Mortenson's article before making my comment. I didnt conflate anything except for what in your imagination you were spoiling to pick bones with, lmso.

"You need to become familiar with Hebrew infinitive absolute construct" is what I typed. There is no plural there because all I was doing was advising Petra1 to become familiar with "Hebrew infinitive absolute" grammar. That's all. Now how you managed to split this up into "conflating different concepts" is pitiably laughable.

Seeing that you tried commenting on Genesis 2:16-17 and 1 Kings 2:36-37 why dont you tell:
1/ What kind of death did A&E die in Genesis 2:16-17 and what kind of death, referencing 1 Kings 2:36-37, did Shimei die off?.
2/ What kind of death did Shimei die of, for leaving Jerusalem, huh? Did Shimei die a spiritual death?
3/ If Petra1 says Genesis 2:16-17 denotes a spiritual death because of the "You will not surely die." phrase why because of 1 Kings 2:36-37, isnt spiritual death too applicable to Shimei then. Smh sigh.

petra1:
You did not . Pastor Chris never made reference to book of enoch . I was the one who use book of enoch as part of my research. You were assuming. Kindly listen to the teaching objectively then let's discuss biblically if you have objections. But I doubt you will have any objection

Look at you, just like your pastor slandering others. God gave me the grace to sit down and listen to the entire two hours and thirty minute broadcast

Now tell me. Did your pastor quote or not quote Jude 1:6 in the broadcast and then teach with it, claiming that it was demons aka fallen angels, who left their estate to go have sex with female human beings and impregnate them to deliver giants, hmm?

He made reference to Jude 1:6, which it and 2 Peter 2:4, that he also quoted, are excerpts from the accursed Book of Enoch (i.e. BoE, 1 Enoch 10:11-13)

It was at this point that he began wrongly teaching on the premise that since angels appear in human form, it means they actually are capable of having sexual intercourse with human beings and so this according to his perverted teaching is what the demons aka fallen angels did. Everything he was saying stopped being factual with him veering off, to satisfy his flesh with making this unfounded serious allegation. Why not fast forward the 1.00.19 minute mark and listen to him setting himself up to start teaching his heresy, lmso (i.e. 2 Peter 2:1) Further on, he even claims that the sons of God in Genesis 6:4 are fallen angels. Smh sigh.

petra1:
[s]Don't act like buhari definition of Nigeria youth. You can't be commenting on what you have not listen to
Watch snd listen to the teaching and come up with comments. We can look at scriptures. [/s]

What do you take me for?
How do you think I was able to make my comments if I didnt cringeworthily listen to the entire thing.
It's just finished and closed with an outro, same as the delusional and ludicrous faking the gift of speaking in tongues intro.

petra1:
[s]Fastward to 30 mins. The teaching starts. [/s]

Tell me something I dont already know.

I know the bad teaching started at the 30 mins mark because you already said so in the original post.

Fyi, my post was in direct reply to Kobojunkiee asking for the transcript of a live two and half hours long broadcast.

Please let your pastor know that Apostle Peter and Jude in their epistles were actually debunking those believing in the fabled content circulated in apocryphal Book of Enoch (i.e. BoE). Apostle Peter and Jude quoting from the BoE, isnt them accepting the content they were paraphrasing and quoted.

I often quote from the Quran and even Odu Ifa, but it doesnt mean because I quote from the Quran and even Odu Ifa, that what I have quoted, is gospel, but rather just means that, I have quoted from Quran and even Odu Ifa, or that I have made reference to Quran and even Odu Ifa, plainly and calculatingly to make a point by reading out excerpts from Quran and even Odu Ifa, to the hearing of my audience, who I know are familiar with those quotes from Quran and even Odu Ifa, and to expose the falseness or incorrectness of their beliefs, fables and false teaching.

Go check out the the intro of Jude and 2 Peter 2, to find out that they both started with talking of false prophets and false teachers creeping up among the early believers, secretly introducing destructive heresies. Which is exactly what your pastor did in that video. He joined their gang in slandering the angels, he was not afraid to heap abuse on celestial beings, just as Apostle Peter, for posterity sake in 2 Peter 2:10 penned and Apostle Jude, in Jude 1:10, confirmed that these people including your pastor, slander what they do not understand. Even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not himself dare to condemn him for slander but said, "The Lord rebuke you!", but you guys have the temerity to say what is not possible.

God is not man that He should lie. It was human beings who were blessed to multiply on earth and not incorporeal celestial beings. Smh sigh.

The missing link isn't the angels, lmso. The missing link aren't demons aka fallen angels, as claimed in your pastor's time wasted two hours confused dot com bad teaching, lmso. Notice he lost steam into the 40 minutes mark and so went into a ramble of putting together disjointed fragments of information, smh sigh.

Kobojunkiee:
TRanscript abeg

TRanscript sic for an over two and a half hours video?
What a delusional and ludicrous faking the gift of speaking in tongues intro, smh sigh

Image123:
Adeboye is not Oyedepo's mate.

I never said Adeboye is Oyedepo's mate

petra1:
This is beautiful

[img]https://media./images/0faa65b5e8e648d47104de35dc383f2a/tenor.gif[/img]

jamesid29:
[s]I believe you are conflating two different concepts:
1) An Infinitive absolute verb form paired together with the finite verb of the same root word as a way of expressing the certainty of an action (That is: repeating the same root word twice with one of them being an infinitive absolute inorder to lay emphasis).

2) Infinitive construct used with certain prepositions like "ke(כְּ/as)" to denote the commencement of an action or use the infinitive absolute of the specific root "halowk (הלךְ/going)" to convey a sense of continuance of the action of the main verb.

This two concepts are different and convey different meanings.

Basically when a word is repeated twice with one being in an infinitive absolute verb form and the other,a finite verb form, the infinitive absolute acts as an adverb in expressing intensity, certainty or completeness of the main verb. Hence in most cases, translation would use words like "surely", "definitely", "certainly", "without doubt" etc to try an convey what the text is saying.

E.g .
Gen 37:33 "Joseph has surely(or without doubt) been torn to pieces" ( here we have the word taraph(to tear) repeated twice "taroph toraph". The infinitive absolute verb form followed by the finite verb form to convey the conviction in Jacobs mind that without a doubt, Joseph has been torn to pieces.

Same concept is conveyed in Gen 2:17 the word "die" is repeated twice in the form of "dying" and die "moth tamuth" and is translated as "surely die" to convey the certainty that in the very day they eat of the fruit, they will surely die(not that they would be in a state of dying).

The link you posted from answersingenesis also agrees with petra1 that in that very day, Adam and Eve died( spiritually).

A popular example of the other usage(2) in my write-up is Judges 14:9, where you have the infinitive absolute "halowk(going)" used with the verb "akal(to eat) to express a continuing action of eating.
"He took some of it in his hands and went going and-eating".
Translated as: "He scraped it out into his hands and went on, eating as he went". [/s]

[img]https://media./images/f879ac0258098623c7d587d6cd057b4f/tenor.gif[/img]
Some just have eyes but don't see

When was the intensity, certainty or completeness of the main verb then? Did it end with spiritual death alone, hmm?

Did death stop with spiritual death or physical death, in Adam's case, did some 930 years catching up, in order to make Genesis 2:17's prophecy be fulfilled and complete?

"¹⁶And the LORD God commanded him,
“You may eat freely from every tree of the garden,
¹⁷but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil;
for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die."
- Genesis 2:16-17

"³⁶Then the king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him,
“Build yourself a house in Jerusalem and dwell there, and do not go out from there anywhere.
³⁷For it shall be, on the day you go out and cross the Brook Kidron,
know for certain you shall surely die; your blood shall be on your own head.”
- 1 Kings 2:36-37,

Instead of you unashamedly proof texting with Genesis 37:33, why didnt you attempt making a point with using 1 Kings 2:36-37, lmso?. After all 1 Kings 2:36-37 is a mirror of Genesis 2:17, but of course, you would have dug yourself into a hole if you did because as you ought to know, context is king, lmso. Smh sigh.

answersingenesis.org
by Dr. Terry Mortenson
on May 2, 2007; last featured November 24, 2015

So, from all this we conclude that, the construction “dying you shall die” and beyôm in Genesis 2:17 do not require us, to conclude that God was warning that, “the very day you eat from the tree is the exact same day that you will die physically.”

The Hebrew wording of Genesis 2:17 allows for a time lapse between the instantaneous spiritual death on that sad day of disobedience and the later physical death (which certainly did happen, just as God said, but for Adam it was 930 years later).

As Scripture consistently teaches, both kinds of death (spiritual and physical) are the consequence of Adam’s rebellion.

https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/genesis-2-17-you-shall-surely-die/

MuttleyLaff:
"Sin came into the world through one man, and his sin brought death with it.
As a result, death has spread to the whole human race because everyone has sinned."
- Romans 5:12

"So you see, just as death came into the world through a man,
now the resurrection from the dead has begun through another man."
- 1 Corinthians 15:21

Maybe you missed that I crossed out "very suddenly" in your post. You are parking in ordinarily "muth" when the verse focused on "muth muth" Besides, "very suddenly. . ." in that Strong's Concordance excerpt, has a prepended "X" to it. The "X" means, "very suddenly. . ." when used or taken into consideration, multiples the original meaning of the word, it now is trying to associate with.

You need to become familiar with Hebrew infinitive absolute construct

The scripture clearly states that through one man death came into the world. From reading Romans 5:12 & 1 Corinthians 15:21, what death do you think Genesis 2:17 is talking of and that true to form, did so happen to man?

MaxInDHouse:
[s]Mr one man MOPOL, you said

"if i want to be cured"
because i kept saying
"my Own God detests homosexuality" and not ready to start explaining.
Your fellow Trinitarians are also saying exactly the same thing without explanations nah.
So go and cure them first before curing a JW Sir! [/s]

Here I thought it was only your disorder, homophobia, that you need getting cured from, little did I know that contextomy is another vice of yours. Smh sigh
JEHOVAH'S WICKEDNESS must have their hands full with Mr Blockears who keeps lumping me together with Trinitarians

MaxInDHouse:
Please go cure all trinitarians arguing against homosexuality first at least they're your fellow believers claiming Jesus is Almighty God!

Don't be daft, people aren't cured of homosexuality, same way, people aren't cured of heterosexuality. It is homophobia that people get cured from

MaxInDHouse:
I'm one of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES i don't agree with your TRINITY stuff, your fellow Trinitarians should be cured first Sir!

... and I am a one man MOPOL, so stop lumping me together with others. Stop pinning TRINITY stuff and/or Trinitarians on me. You must be deaf on hearing and blind to seeing, to keep mistaking me as arguing against homosexuality

Now, fyi, I don't give a monkey's even if you're five of JEHOVAH'S WICKEDNESS. JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES and/or JEHOVAH'S WICKEDNESS will both have their comeuppance in the end, lmso. Run along now zombified, there's a good bwoy, lmso

MaxInDHouse:
Thanks Sir, i prefer not to be cured!

See if I care you don't. It is better that you remain an ignoranus consciously than to make yourself believe and/or think that you know, lmso.

If you're intelligent you'll start taking scalding super hot blistering showers to practice

MaxInDHouse:
Never mind Sir, it's our own God that detests it not yours so you can continue practicing or encouraging those practicing it!

MuttleyLaff:
If you really know and understand what your God exactly detests in it, then it shouldn't be difficult for you to answer the following easy peasy lemon queasy simple, harmless, innocent, straightforward questions
1/ Mr MaxInDHouse, what exactly does your God detest in homosexuality?
2/ What exactly does your God detest in homosexuality and please back up your answering with correctly and properly interpreted scripture?
3/ What specifically is evil in homosexuality?

---

---

---

MaxInDHouse:
[s]The highlighted has spoken enough in volumes Sir!

"What exactly does YOUR God"meaning you have noticed some fine qualities in my God through the conduct of his worshipers, otherwise you won't give a damn what he says!

Why are you interested in what our own God say? after all your god also lay claim that it is the author of the Bible. Why not just forget about our God and continue worshiping your god with sound sleep?

For your information, JWs aren't interested in whatever other gods says, we concentrate fully on what our God says. As Witnesses of our God it's the way and manner we comport ourselves that attracts others into looking onto our God.

So why are you so much interested in what our God says?
Why can't you just forget about our God, his worshipers and whatever he says since you've noticed that his worshipers detests what you love? [/s]

[img]https://media1./images/c62fcaa989044a6345b29560dc8219c0/tenor.gif[/img]
Don't be so incomprehensibly self conceited.

It is only an unintelligent person who wouldn't know and see that I was parroting you and using your very own currencies to extract information so to understand the extent of the disorder called homophobia that you have.

The good news is that, your disorder, is sometimes curable, but only if you want to be cured though, lmso, so why not be a good JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES sheepified and zombified Mr MaxInDHouse bwoy, run along and get to start answering the earlier three easy peasy lemon queasy simple, harmless, innocent, straightforward questions
1/ What exactly does your God detest in homosexuality?
2/ What exactly does your God detest in homosexuality and please back up your answering with correctly and properly interpreted scripture?
3/ What specifically is evil in homosexuality?

MaxInDHouse:
Never mind Sir, it's our own God that detests it not yours so you can continue practicing or encouraging those practicing it!

If you really know and understand what your God exactly detests in it, then it shouldn't be difficult for you to answer the following easy peasy lemon queasy simple, harmless, innocent, straightforward questions
1/ Mr MaxInDHouse, what exactly does your God detest in homosexuality?
2/ What exactly does your God detest in homosexuality and please back up your answering with correctly and properly interpreted scripture?
3/ What specifically is evil in homosexuality?

MuttleyLaff:
luv/mijeje, you are worst than a zombie, you are an ignoranus and more.

Paul was born a Jew in the Roman city of Tarsus, hence him addressed as Saul of Tarsus. Saul was his Hebrew name and Paul his Roman name. Though he had dual citizenship, he still was proud of his Jewish heritage, evidence of this can be read in Philippians 3:5, so what are you on about huh?

---

---

---

petra1:
So whats the big deal
Saul had two names. He switched from one to the other. What's the big deal freeze
Why making issue out of nothing? Is that a message?

He was trying to message how faith have become needlessly politicised.

From my POV, Apostle Paul rightfully used politics, and used it, not for personal gain nor for direct or personal financial benefits, like how our local pastorpreneurs, sets up churches as business ventures taking advantages of government tax breaks, indiscriminate import duty waivers, other import tax exempts et cetera

Apostle Paul used politics good and so to get passage to preach the Gospel in the court of Caesar, in Rome, to preach to king Agrippa et cetera

MaxInDHouse:
No wahala Mr Muttleylaff our God totally differ from yours. PERIOD!

1/ Mr MaxInDHouse, what exactly does your God detest in homosexuality?
2/ What exactly does your God detest in homosexuality and please back up your answering with correctly and properly interpreted scripture?
3/ What specifically is evil in homosexuality?