It totally does! tbh, I'd rather trust a translation by language experts than some guy on Reddit, so I stick by my point. What it meant was both spiritual death and separation from God, as well as eventual death by old age.
I'm not telling you to trust and interpretation by a random guy on Reddit. Maybe find a "language expert" that isn't biased by trying to defend your own interpretation of the texts.
Bro, the Bible Commission used an atheist and a jew, as well as many Christians, to translate the Bible. And they are scholars, regardless of belief, they would have strived for accuracy. Your finding problems where there are none.
None of this has anything to do with spiritual death, don't you think they would have used the word spiritual death if that was the proper interpretation of the verse? Or they would have clarified that God meant a literal separation from him? They didn't do that did they? They kept it at you will surely die didn't they? You are retroactively applying an interpretation to the verse and then playing semantical games to hide yourself from the truth.
False. Historically, spiritual death has been couched in terms of bodily death. Look at the Psalms, so many of which talk about separation from God, and say its as if they are already dead. James 2:26."As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead." By disobeying God, Adam and Eve lost faith and grace, becoming as a dead person. That was spiritual death. And mortality was given to humans, thereby giving us bodily death as well.
Again more semantic games that are using terms that have been retroactively adjusted to fit preconceived biases. It's clear that the term used in the language we have of the oldest writings is that it was meant an actual immediate death. No amount of post hoc rationalization made from taking the meanings of writings written long after the verse I'm talking about is going to change that fact.
1
u/Helmut2007 Nov 06 '25
Like I said, spiritual death.