Did God Lie to Adam?

As just about any Christian can affirm, the Bible is clear about one very specific attribute of God—namely, that He cannot lie by virtue of His own nature. We know this from verses like Titus 1:2 and Hebrews 6:18. In fact, the verse in Hebrews goes so far as to say it's outright impossible for God to lie.

A common objection to Christianity that has persisted for centuries, however, is the assertion that God did exactly that when speaking to Adam in the Garden of Eden. But does this objection really hold water? Let's take a look into the book of Genesis to find out.

Genesis 2:16-17 reads in the New American Standard Bible, "The Lord God commanded the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may freely eat; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for on the day that you eat from it you will certainly die.'"

That seems like a pretty straightforward statement, doesn't it? "Eat the fruit from this tree and as soon as you do, you die." The problem is, just a chapter later, we see the all-too-familiar story of the serpent tempting Eve that ultimately ends with both the woman and the man eating of that very forbidden fruit. We know, however, that neither Adam nor Eve actually died that day because the book of Genesis goes on to tell us not only that they had multiple children after this incident, but that Adam lived for another 800 years after the birth of their third son, Seth (Genesis 5:4).

So, does that mean God lied when He said, "...for on the day that you eat from it you will certainly die?" The short answer to that question is not necessarily. To get a full picture of what the available evidence might mean, we must first examine the historical context.

A common method of reconciling this apparent contradiction in the biblical narrative is to say the death referenced in Genesis 2:17 isn't a physical death, but a spiritual one. On one hand, this can appear a viable option since the first sin of Adam and Eve did result in separation between them and God in the expulsion from the Garden. On the other hand, does it really make sense for God to threaten two people who apparently didn't know good from evil with something so abstract as spiritual death?

If such a threat were the intent of the message in Genesis 2:17, it seems to lack much of a point since there's no reason to believe Adam and Eve would even understand the concept. And without any understanding of the concept of spiritual death, the threat would carry no weight. Thus, it seems we can safely assume this common explanation isn't the strong defeater it's been thought to be.

Another, I think much better, option to explain the apparent contradiction here is that the phrase, "...for on the day that you eat from it you will certainly die," is best viewed as a Hebraism—an ancient Hebrew idiom. This perspective can be supported by the use of the same phrase, "on the day," in 1 Kings 2:37. In that verse, Solomon is telling Shimei to stay in Jerusalem under the same threat of death.

In the verses that follow that threat, Shimei ultimately does end up going to Gath and back, which is a multi-day journey. On the day he left, Shimei was neither killed physically nor spiritually, but a modern way of describing it is that as soon as he left, he was as good as dead. And the promised physical execution did happen in verse 46.

The command and threat from God in Genesis 2 can—and like many scholars, I believe it should—be interpreted in the same way. No, Adam and Eve did not die on the day they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but their death warrants were signed in that instant. From then on, mankind was afflicted with death and the immortality given by the tree of life was no more.

Yes, mankind was separated from God on that day, as well, but that isn't the point or the meaning of the threat of death presented in Genesis 2. The death being referenced in that verse was a literal, physical death, but the threat itself was simply not meant to be a promise of immediate consequences to the prohibited action. Rather, God was simply telling Adam what the ultimate result of his disobedience would be and thus, was entirely truthful in the statement.