Jump to content


Photo

Death Before Adam's Sin


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#21 Air-run

Air-run

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Evolution, The Bible, Theology, Art, Video Games
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Seattle, Washington

Posted 27 June 2011 - 09:45 PM

The 6 days of creation were done before sin. What is time before sin? It's eternal. So can the laws that we currently have explain how eternity works? Of course not.

So all living things created in the eternal 6 days did not require food. And because death cannot exist in eternity, all created life ate, if they ate, vegetation only.

Eternity cannot be eternal if there are physical requirements (food) in order to survive.


Wow, that's quite a load to swallow. I don't see how you can gather any of that from scripture. In fact, Genesis 1:14 says the stars and such were for the "marking of seasons and days and years." That sounds like time to me. Or are you saying that they were only useful as markers of time after the fall. Seriously, I think that is close to irrationality. Creation was good, it wasn't perfect. Timeless perfection can only come when we are perfectly united with God. I hope you agree that heaven will be a more perfect reality than the Garden of Eden. With Christ, we can be closer to God than Adam ever could.

Maybe you or someone else could answer me this question that has been rolling around in my head about this topic:

Do you think the animals were initially created as eternal creatures? Would they have lived forever if man never sinned? What happens when the entire earth was completely covered with creatures? Would they stop mating? Did mice and bugs have the intellect to know when to stop mating?

Here's a tidbit on flies: "Scientists have calculated that a pair of flies beginning reproduction in April may be progenitors, under optiminal conditions and if all were to live, of 191,010,000,000,000,000,000 flies by August."

I heard the quote somewhere that it wouldn't take too many years for flies to cover the earth several feet deep if they never died. Just imagine how many mice and rabbits would cover the earth if they never died.

Just some thoughts. I appreciate any honest answer.

#22 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 28 June 2011 - 03:30 AM

Wow, that's quite a load to swallow. I don't see how you can gather any of that from scripture. In fact, Genesis 1:14 says the stars and such were for the "marking of seasons and days and years." That sounds like time to me. Or are you saying that they were only useful as markers of time after the fall. Seriously, I think that is close to irrationality. Creation was good, it wasn't perfect. Timeless perfection can only come when we are perfectly united with God. I hope you agree that heaven will be a more perfect reality than the Garden of Eden. With Christ, we can be closer to God than Adam ever could.

Maybe you or someone else could answer me this question that has been rolling around in my head about this topic:

Do you think the animals were initially created as eternal creatures? Would they have lived forever if man never sinned? What happens when the entire earth was completely covered with creatures? Would they stop mating? Did mice and bugs have the intellect to know when to stop mating?

Here's a tidbit on flies: "Scientists have calculated that a pair of flies beginning reproduction in April may be progenitors, under optiminal conditions and if all were to live, of 191,010,000,000,000,000,000 flies by August."

I heard the quote somewhere that it wouldn't take too many years for flies to cover the earth several feet deep if they never died. Just imagine how many mice and rabbits would cover the earth if they never died.

Just some thoughts. I appreciate any honest answer.


Time exists in heaven:

rev 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.

Before sin, time moved forward while age was constant. After sin, age became parallel with time. So as time moves forward, you get older.

Question: Does age have to be connected to time, or can they be 2 separate processes?

I'll go into it a little deeper.

1) Time - aging = eternity. Because if you don;t age, you live forever.
2) Time - aging = no birthing. When would anything age or grow up if aging does not exist yet? so you cannot be birthed into this.
3) Time - aging - birthing = a time that requires creation. If you cannot be birthed, then you have to be created.

After sin birthing became what replaced creating. Never again was anything created.

Examples: When Jesus made wine, he did not just create it. he told the servants to pour water into the vases and He altered the water and made wine.

When Jonah was swallowed buy a whale, God did not create a whale to do this. He took what was already created and prepared it (as the Bible puts it) to swallow Jonah.

God is not a law breaker that He would create a law then break it. The current time-line does not allow for the type of creation that existed before sin. So creation is no more because birthing life replaced it. this is why birthing was considered a curse when Adam and Eve were removed from the garden.

#23 Air-run

Air-run

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Evolution, The Bible, Theology, Art, Video Games
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Seattle, Washington

Posted 28 June 2011 - 09:52 PM

After sin birthing became what replaced creating. Never again was anything created.

So creation is no more because birthing life replaced it. this is why birthing was considered a curse when Adam and Eve were removed from the garden.


So, you're saying that neither animals nor man mated before the fall? I've never heard anyone suggest that. Do you know others who hold this view. It certainly doesn't seem to jive with God's instructions to the animals to "be fruitful and increase in number..." or God's instructions to Adam and Eve to "be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it." Those instructions were given pre-fall. The only thing that changed after the fall was an increase in pain in childbearing. (BTW, the wording almost suggests that Eve started having children before the fall, otherwise, how would she understand what to compare an increase in pain in childbearing to. If she didn't know what to expect in childbearing before the fall, extreme pain might have seemed normal to Eve.)

#24 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 29 June 2011 - 03:46 AM

So, you're saying that neither animals nor man mated before the fall? I've never heard anyone suggest that. Do you know others who hold this view. It certainly doesn't seem to jive with God's instructions to the animals to "be fruitful and increase in number..." or God's instructions to Adam and Eve to "be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it." Those instructions were given pre-fall. The only thing that changed after the fall was an increase in pain in childbearing. (BTW, the wording almost suggests that Eve started having children before the fall, otherwise, how would she understand what to compare an increase in pain in childbearing to. If she didn't know what to expect in childbearing before the fall, extreme pain might have seemed normal to Eve.)



ok,then those children that she had did they sin? as only adam and eve ate of the forbidden tree. if cain and able were after the fall then they were like adam and eve,but if before why were they cast out of the garden of eden?

we wont know what that pre-fall state was as are only told so much.

#25 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 29 June 2011 - 08:11 AM

So, you're saying that neither animals nor man mated before the fall? I've never heard anyone suggest that. Do you know others who hold this view. It certainly doesn't seem to jive with God's instructions to the animals to "be fruitful and increase in number..." or God's instructions to Adam and Eve to "be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it." Those instructions were given pre-fall. The only thing that changed after the fall was an increase in pain in childbearing. (BTW, the wording almost suggests that Eve started having children before the fall, otherwise, how would she understand what to compare an increase in pain in childbearing to. If she didn't know what to expect in childbearing before the fall, extreme pain might have seemed normal to Eve.)


Will we mate in heaven? Will animals that exist there mate? And for what reason if nothing can be birthed if all live forever?

God allowed reproduction because how else would everything survive after sin that caused death? But what would be the purpose before sin when everything lives forever? Because the temporal creation had the choice of sin and death, God had to create all things living with the ability to reproduce. We die here physically. Do angels die physically? Did Lucifer die physically before being cast into Hell? No. Why? because they were eternal created beings. If we were not different, then why did God create us in a separate dimension from the rest?

Hebrew 2:6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him?
7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:

To be created on the same level would mean we were created to be eternal beings. Even Christ had to be made lower than the angels so that He could die for our sins.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Sin = death. So until sin, even though we were created to reproduce, there was no need. Heck, Adam and Eve did not even know they were naked until they sinned. So their minds were as innocent children. Children that would run around naked and have no shame. Sin gave them the knowledge of their nakedness, and the attraction to reproduce.

To make it more simple:

Death = the need for reproduction for survival.
Eternity = no need for reproduction because we live forever so survival is not an issue.

So sin, which caused death, brought on the need for reproduction. To create man with the ability to cause death and not live a way for man to survive, would be an imperfect creation.

Example: Man sins, causes death. When he dies, along with the rest of creation, that's it.

So just because God created all things to reproduce before sin, does not mean they did or even tried until after sin. The animals could have had the same child like knowledge Adam and Eve did before sin.

Another thing. For God to create life non-eternal before sin, would be God creating death. And sin would not be the only thing that caused death. So yes the first created animals were created to live forever. Man's sin effected them as well.

#26 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 29 June 2011 - 08:46 AM

I believe I've heard both Bob Enyart and Fred Williams argue that theistic evolution is not Biblically sound because it would entail lots of animal death occurring before Adam's fall. I know I've heard Ken Ham use that argument.


I'm not particularly fond of theistic evolution, but I'd like to discuss why I think this line of reasoning doesn't fit the bill. I think there are much better arguments for why TE runs into problems with a plain interpretation of Scripture.

The central scripture used from the creationist perspective is Romans 5:12 "Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin…" First, I want to make it clear that this verse specifically goes on to say that the result of Adam's sin was that "death spread to all men." It doesn't say that Adam's sin brought death to all the animals. This passage has nothing to do with animal death and it is not honest to use this verse as proof that animals didn't die until Adam sinned.

I want to make a few brief comments about what the word "death" means in the Bible, especially in this context. Overwhelmingly, I believe that when death is referenced to sin, it is talking about a spiritual death – not a ceasing of bodily functions. In the same token, the new "life" of being "born again" doesn't have anything to do with increased bodily functions, but with our spirits being made alive to God and united with Him. I think this makes sense when you read God's warning to Adam against eating the fruit – "in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die." If God meant physical death, He was a liar, because Adam didn't physically die on the same day that he ate the fruit. On the other hand, there was a spiritual aspect of Adam that died that day – that of relationship with God without boundaries. God didn't do anything to change the lifespan of man until much later, during Noah's days.

Now, let me make a very practical argument for why I think there was animal death before Adam sinned. The central scripture against carnivorous animals is Genesis 1:30 "to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food." I don't think this is a comprehensive treatise on the diets of early animals. It says the reason God made plants was for a source of food. It should seem obvious, though, that this wasn't the sole source of food for every creature. First, there are bacteria that use photosynthesis for energy. They "move on the earth" and they don't eat plants. I'll jump to a larger species. Do you really think baleen whales survived on a diet of seaweed or algae? It seems obvious that their teeth were designed to filter krill from the water. It is physically impossible for most species of large whales to swim into shallow enough water where seaweed grows to eat it. There are other ocean creatures who make their home in very deep dark waters where no sea plants can grow – such as angler fish. Again, it seems obvious that the bioluminescent dangle of the angler fish is designed by God to assist it in hunting for other fish!

Evidence of a predatorial world is also seen in the complex defense mechanisms of many creatures. Why were skunks created with stinky spray? Why were echidnas and porcupines created with defensive armor? Why are many animals created with elaborate camouflage mechanisms? The obvious answer is that they needed to defend themselves against larger predators. This was part of God's original Garden of Eden plan.

I find it terribly odd to believe that the complex circle of life and a detailed carnivorous ecosystem was the result of the fall of Adam. Frog's tongues were designed to eat flies, not flowers. Same goes for anteaters tongues. Do you really think T-Rex was designed with 3 inch spiked teeth to nibble tree leaves? I've heard some creationists admit that some animals ate bugs, but say that this wasn't really "death." I beg to differ. This only logically makes sense if you don't think bugs are actually alive. That makes one wonder how large or complex an organism has to be in order to be considered "alive." I think Jesus throws that logic out the window when he says "unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies…." I realize He was making a spiritual point, but there is no denying that he equivocated the severing of a wheat grain to a type of dying.

I think the idea of an Eden animal kingdom where all the creatures are buddies is mistakenly implied from passages about God's future kingdom where "the wolf will dwell with the lamb." Perhaps it is concluded that the animal kingdom will be restored to a place of peace that it once enjoyed. First, I might conclude that those passages are more symbolic of spiritual realities than literal ones. Second, just because the animal kingdom may one day enter such a state, doesn't mean that it was once that way. Some might think a peaceful and quiet animal kingdom in Genesis represents God better than a wild and bloody one. I think this is an inadequate view of God. God's character isn't fully captured by calm and quiet. God's nature is also one of wildness and danger – of smoking mountains and fiery bushes. Of course, on the other hand, you can continue believing that giant squids used their barbed tentacles and sharp beaks to harvest sea fans before Adam sinned.


Hello all,

To stir the pot a bit on this subject, I want to post a conjecture made by Bob Enyart as to exactly when Adam and Eve fell after they were created. Bob's argument, while conjecture, makes a lot of sense to me. Here it is:

The Fall

There are many false theories of creation and the fall of man. One is that God did not finish creation in six literal days. Arguments for this is that a "thousand years to God is as a day." But believers who fall for this are being weak. Genesis stated that in six days God finished His work and rested, and He reconfirms this in Exodus.

Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Gen. 2:1-2

For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. Ex. 20: 11

Secular evolutionists say it took millions or billions of years. Weak Christians say God created, but He could have taken millions and billions of years. There is no evidence, fossil or otherwise, to support secular evolution. Neither is there evidence for creationist evolution. Weak Christians believe He was incapable of creation in six days.

On the other side of the coin, Christians who say that God could have created all in six seconds are demeaning the great accomplishment of God's magnificent work. It was a massive, gigantic, wonderful, beautiful and magnificent feat which took amounts of energy that we could never comprehend with our pea brains. And, God rested on the seventh day.

Adam and Eve Created Sinless

Chapter One of Genesis gives a detailed account of God creating and on the sixth day, He created Adam and Eve (from Adam's rib). Chapter Two is a mini-flashback of Chapter One and adds a few details about creation of Adam and Eve and how they were placed in the Garden. From verse one of chapter one to the last verse chapter two, there is no evidence that any sin, rebellion, or wickedness of any kind had entered the cosmos.

Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Gen. 1:31 (last verse)

And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. Gen. 2:25 (last verse)

The Offense at the Tree

By the fifteenth verse of chapter 3 of Genesis, all Hell breaks loose. So a good question to ask is, "How much time elapsed between creation and sin entering the cosmos?" We can be certain that it was a very short period of time. And we can reasonably assume that it was less than seven days or less. How can we reasonably assume this?

Let's examine the evidence. Did Adam and Eve have any children prior to the Fall? The first mention of Eve conceiving is in Genesis chapter 4, verse l, and then she gave birth to Cane. And Cane, being conceived after the Fall, inherited sinful flesh (tendency to sin) from his father Adam. If Eve had conceived prior to the Fall, then Cane would have been born a sinless human being for "in Adam all died" (1 Cor. 15:22 also Rom. 5:12). So we can reasonably assume that Eve did not conceive prior to the Fall.

Would Adam and Eve have had any trouble conceiving and having children? Would they have had to go to a fertility clinic? No! God made them physically perfect. And God also told them to "be fruitful and multiply" in Chapter 1:22, before the Fall. How much time would have passed after creation before Adam and Eve began to have physical relations? Before answering, remember that it would be several thousand years before the male of the species would be distracted by NFL football. And also remember that Eve was handcrafted by the hand of God and was most likely "hot" as we say today. And they were naked!

Almost all living creatures have the same reproductive system. The female of the species has ovaries which contain eggs. And the ovaries release the egg or eggs on a cycle. It's either an annual cycle (like sheep) or a monthly cycle. Human beings, for example, are on a 28-day cycle average. The human body prepares the uterus to receive a fertilized egg. The uterus lining fills with blood and fluid to receive this fertilized egg, if it should happen. If it is fertilized, the egg will be implanted and gestation will begin for a certain period of time depending on how God made each species. For humans, it is nine months on average. If the egg is not fertilized, it will pass through (menstrual cycle), preparing the way for the next cycle to kick in.

The average, healthy cycle for women is 28 days. Although most women are on that cycle, there are some variations. When does the cycle begin? If you ask a woman who has been trying to get pregnant and has observed her body, or you ask a baby doctor, you are always told that it is the first day of her Period or menstrual cycle. But if you read a medical text book or get a doctor to talk on a more technical level, you will discover that this is not when it begins, but when the cycle ends. For when the egg is not implanted in the uterus, then the body flushes the inner lining of the uterus. After the flushing, the uterus is prepared again to receive a new egg. The beginning of the cycle is when the uterus begins to build up the nutrition and the environment it will need to receive an implanted fertilized egg.

When does ovulation occur? Fourteen days from the first day of the period. The normal menstrual period is five days. Five subtracted from fourteen is nine days. From the beginning of the cycle, it takes 9 days for ovulation (when a woman can become pregnant). If God created Eve fresh, so to speak, then nine days later (after the sixth day of creation), she could become pregnant. Now consider that Adam's sperm can live inside Eve for a few days. If we subtract two days, we are left with seven days. Seven days is the outer limit of when Adam and Eve could have fallen. All this is predicated on whether everything would work as God had designed it to work and that if Adam and Eve behaved as human beings are expected to behave. Also most intriguing is that Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day or the day before the Sabbath (Saturday). Six and seven are thirteen (the number of rebellion). If Adam and Even sinned on the seventh day after their creation, then they sinned on Friday the thirteenth. Interesting, no?

Written by Pastor Bob Enyart, Denver Bible Church, Arvada, Colorado.

TeeJay

#27 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 30 June 2011 - 02:32 AM

For God to give man the option of the choice of sin, and not create man with the ability to deal with what happens after sin (death equals the need to reproduce or cease to exist). Would be an imperfect creation. And would mean that God does not know all to allow His creation to just die off.

Let's put this another way: If you were the creator, and went to all the effort to create the universe, life, and all the laws that allow life to exist on this planet. Would it be smart to allow your creation of man an option that would allow them to become extinct, leaving what you created (the universe) no real purpose?

#28 Air-run

Air-run

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Evolution, The Bible, Theology, Art, Video Games
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Seattle, Washington

Posted 01 July 2011 - 12:58 AM

Sin = death. So until sin, even though we were created to reproduce, there was no need. Heck, Adam and Eve did not even know they were naked until they sinned. So their minds were as innocent children. Children that would run around naked and have no shame. Sin gave them the knowledge of their nakedness, and the attraction to reproduce.

Another thing. For God to create life non-eternal before sin, would be God creating death. And sin would not be the only thing that caused death. So yes the first created animals were created to live forever. Man's sin effected them as well.


So are you saying that God's original plan was for Adam and Eve to live forever? Just the two of them forever? No offspring? No s@x?

I find that disturbing.

Please be specific about your response to God's command to be fruitful and multiply before the fall!

So you think attraction to the opposite s@x was a result of the fall? I shake my head... Attraction to nakedness = shame??

Bob's interpretation seems reasonable.

I'm not sure that God made Adam and Eve to live forever. The only time the Bible talks about God shortening man's days is after the flood. What would be so bad about Adam and Eve living 900 years, dying, taking on incorruptible spirit, and living eternally in God's presence? I tend to think that the wages of sin being death is spiritual death, separation from God. That is a much more severe punishment to Adam than dying physically. You can die physically but still be with God. Spiritual death = total separation = a death of what is pure in you.

#29 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 01 July 2011 - 03:57 PM

[quote] name='ikester7579' timestamp='1309426332' post='73120']
For God to give man the option of the choice of sin, and not create man with the ability to deal with what happens after sin (death equals the need to reproduce or cease to exist). Would be an imperfect creation. And would mean that God does not know all to allow His creation to just die off.

Let's put this another way: If you were the creator, and went to all the effort to create the universe, life, and all the laws that allow life to exist on this planet. Would it be smart to allow your creation of man an option that would allow them to become extinct, leaving what you created (the universe) no real purpose?[/quote]

ikester,

Love has to be freely given. Just as God can't be illogical and create a square circle, God can't give you free will and then force you to love Him. Whenever you love someone, you are taking a risk that they will not love you back. I married my wife because she loves me. I cherish her love because she is free to love another, but she loves me. If she were not free to love me, her love for me would be of no value. After 35 years of marriage, I'm pretty sure that she will not run off with another man, but nothing is certain. Love is a risk. God took a great risk when he created Adam and Eve and gave them the will to either love Him or hate Him; to live with Him or apart from Him.

God gave man the ability to reproduce before the Fall and the ability to reproduce after the Fall. If Adam had had children before the Fall, then those children would have been born sinless. But Adam had no children before the Fall, for Paul writes that "all died in Adam." Apparently, the eating from the Tree of Life (which represents Jesus Christ)gave eternal life to Adam and Eve. Recall that God placed an angel to guard the Tree of Life so that Adam and Ev would not eat from it and "live for ever" in their fallen state. Prior to the Flood, men lived hundreds of years. They did not become more righteous with age; they became more wicked: "And God repented that He had made man." In Revelation, the Tree of Life is mentioned in the New Jerusalem. This Tree yields a new fruit each month for 12 months and the leaves is for the "healing of nations." But the Tree of Knowledge went down to the pit of hell as Ezekiel says in the Flood. Jesus said, "Any tree that does not bear good fruit is cast into the fire."

And God does not know all. But He does know everything knowable that He wants to know. He does not know my great, great, great grandson because this grandson does not yet exist. He can't give man free will to choose and then know in advance how he will choose. That is illogical.

Man will never become extinct. If no children had been born of Adam, Adam would still have lived forever. We are created spirit beings that will never cease to exist. Presently, only Jesus has been resurrected. Actually, Jesus is the resurrection. "But the time is coming and is now near when all the dead will be raised--some to eternal glory and some to eternal damnation. There is a "first resurrection" of saints that have gone through the Tribulation and have not denied Christ. These saints will rule with Jesus in the Thousand Year Kingdom. Peter and the twelve will rule over the Twelve Tribes of Israel, as Jesus promised. But at the Great White Throne Judgment, all the dead will be raised. Those who have not accepted Jesus Christ will be in hell with physical bodies.

TeeJay

#30 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 01 July 2011 - 06:00 PM

so my sin that commit tommorow God didnt foreknew?i think you do undersestimate God. God is sovereign allows free will and lets us choose to leave him. he knows when we fail. he knew judas had a devil. How can god forsee the future of things if he cant foreknow what man does?

just because he is aware of the future doesnt negate freewill.he knew jeramiah before he was born.you make God to small.

#31 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 02 July 2011 - 02:12 AM

So are you saying that God's original plan was for Adam and Eve to live forever? Just the two of them forever? No offspring? No s@x?

I find that disturbing.

Please be specific about your response to God's command to be fruitful and multiply before the fall!

So you think attraction to the opposite s@x was a result of the fall? I shake my head... Attraction to nakedness = shame??

Bob's interpretation seems reasonable.

I'm not sure that God made Adam and Eve to live forever. The only time the Bible talks about God shortening man's days is after the flood. What would be so bad about Adam and Eve living 900 years, dying, taking on incorruptible spirit, and living eternally in God's presence? I tend to think that the wages of sin being death is spiritual death, separation from God. That is a much more severe punishment to Adam than dying physically. You can die physically but still be with God. Spiritual death = total separation = a death of what is pure in you.


Can God create imperfection? Nope. He can only create the choice of it.

What was the tree called that Adam and Eve were forbidden to eat from?
So it is safe to say they did not have that knowledge until they ate from it, right?

#32 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 02 July 2011 - 02:24 AM

so my sin that commit tommorow God didnt foreknew?i think you do undersestimate God. God is sovereign allows free will and lets us choose to leave him. he knows when we fail. he knew judas had a devil. How can god forsee the future of things if he cant foreknow what man does?

just because he is aware of the future doesnt negate freewill.he knew jeramiah before he was born.you make God to small.


Foreknowledge does not mean we are set and predestined to the point we are like puppets. God's know's what is going to happen regardless of what we choose. This is because our choices change our destiny and He can see those changes as they happen.

When you imply that our path is set in stone, then you are crossing over into the Calvinist belief that says: From the time of birth, we are set to go to heaven or Hell and there is nothing any of us can do about it. So you have to watch out about swaying to close to that doctrine which has many flaws.

The other part is: How can we be judged for a life we really had no say so over? You see freewill makes us responsible for our actions. Predestined to the point implied means our path was already laid out.

Example: Let's say a robber takes you hostage and tells you: Rob this bank or a member of your family dies. So you do as they say and get caught later. Now when you are judged should they:
a) Judge you by the crime committed and throw out that you were forced to do it?
B) let you go because you were forced to do it, and was not something you intended to do?

When you are forced down a path that is pre-laid for you to follow, how can you be held responsible? Saying that God pre-lays our path is like saying that God runs a matrix. Which means all of our actions, decisions, etc... are controlled and are not by our own freewill. So how do we get judged for a life that was not really our own to live freely?

Are the Calvinists right?

You see we are only predestined to a point. The point that it takes away our freewill to choose is the point we become no longer responsible for what we do.

#33 Air-run

Air-run

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Evolution, The Bible, Theology, Art, Video Games
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Seattle, Washington

Posted 02 July 2011 - 09:25 PM

Can God create imperfection? Nope. He can only create the choice of it.

What was the tree called that Adam and Eve were forbidden to eat from?
So it is safe to say they did not have that knowledge until they ate from it, right?


You lost me. Are you saying the forbidden fruit was S@xual attraction?

I just want a straight answer. Why did God command Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply before the fall if s@x was a byproduct of the fall?

The tree of life is an interesting notion. If Adam was created to live forever, what good was a tree of life? It wasn't a forbidden tree. He could have eaten from it. But what would the point be if he could already live forever?

#34 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 03 July 2011 - 10:53 AM

You lost me. Are you saying the forbidden fruit was S@xual attraction?

I just want a straight answer. Why did God command Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply before the fall if s@x was a byproduct of the fall?

The tree of life is an interesting notion. If Adam was created to live forever, what good was a tree of life? It wasn't a forbidden tree. He could have eaten from it. But what would the point be if he could already live forever?


I don't know how many more ways I can explain it. If I give explanation you say: You lost me. If I give you a straight short answer you want an explanation in which you say: You lost me. One more time and in more detail.

God cannot create imperfection. If He can create imperfection then He is not God.
If God cannot create imperfection then he cannot create things to die.
And since things cannot be created to die, then it has to be a choice (freewill) to die.
Why create these trees of this were not so (a choice)?
Now the only time God was concerned for Adam and Eve eating from the tree of life was after they sinned, not before.
Why only after? Because sin causes death. So the tree of life would have reversed that law.
And how were Adam and Eve going to reproduce if they did not even know they were naked until the ate from the tree?
And why did the people in the OT live so long if we were not created eternal?

#35 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 05 July 2011 - 09:13 AM

Air-Run,

Are you an old earth creationist that believes in the gap theory? If so then I understand the reason you are confused.

#36 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 07 July 2011 - 08:27 AM

The majority of this conversation has been debating whether animal death is perfect or not and you go back with your reasoning and say that death=imperfection in every case. You can't reason like that. That is not logical. You can't base your proof on this assumption.

God cannot create imperfection. If He can create imperfection then He is not God.
If God cannot create imperfection then he cannot create things to die.

This whole debate is centered on this: What does God say is perfect? Who says death isn't perfect? You? or God? How do you know what God considers perfect?

#37 Air-run

Air-run

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Evolution, The Bible, Theology, Art, Video Games
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Seattle, Washington

Posted 09 July 2011 - 09:46 PM

God cannot create imperfection. If He can create imperfection then He is not God.
If God cannot create imperfection then he cannot create things to die.
And since things cannot be created to die, then it has to be a choice (freewill) to die.
Why create these trees of this were not so (a choice)?
Now the only time God was concerned for Adam and Eve eating from the tree of life was after they sinned, not before.
Why only after? Because sin causes death. So the tree of life would have reversed that law.
And how were Adam and Eve going to reproduce if they did not even know they were naked until the ate from the tree?
And why did the people in the OT live so long if we were not created eternal?



I lean toward young earthness, but I think the old earthers bring up some valid biblical objections to a young earth. I guess I'm a middle earther right now (heh heh).

I'm not sure there was any direct answer to my question about why God commanded Adam and Eve to reproduce before they fell. Your answer seems to be that they couldn't reproduce because they didn't know they were naked. That doesn't explain why God gave the command to reproduce pre-fall. Why would God command something they couldn't comprehend. Also, your whole logic that knowledge of nakedness is equivalent to being able to reproduce seems very flawed.

Do you think S@xual attraction is completely based on nakedness? Do you think they didn't know their own bodies? Or what their parts were for? I'm sure God filled them in on the details. That's ridiculous to consider that they didn't understand their own physical body. The key idea behind realizing their nakedness was a new found sense of shame. They didn't know they were naked before because they didn't know what "clothed" meant. Nakedness was natural to them - they didn't need to consider it. In the context, nakedness = shame. They didn't need a sense of nakedness/shame to be compelled to enjoy S@xual relations. In fact, the opposite happened - they covered up - they didn't pursue relations when they realized they were naked.

As far as perfection goes, do you think there are variable levels of perfection? Or is there only one perfect scenario and the rest are sub-perfect? Do you really think that the condition of Eden was better than what we will experience in heaven? Or what we have here on earth now with Christ living IN us? I Cor. 13 talks of the perfect yet to come - meaning perfect hadn't happened on earth yet.

Heaven will be the perfect scenario. So what is this present creation? God called it good, but not perfect. It is the middle step that will pave the way for the perfect creation. If God chose to include temporary bodies in this creation to help pave the way for the perfect creation, so be it. In fact, I see no other way around it. How was Adam ever to enjoy an eternal spiritual existence in the full presence of God if he could never shed his earthly body?

Even if God created every creature to live forever, it doesn't mean that death wasn't a possibility. What if a goat accidentally fell off a 10,000 foot cliff before the fall ( ;) ) Do you think it would have dusted itself off and kept walking? Or do you think 1) accidents couldn't happen before the fall, or 2) gravity was different, or 3) our physical bodies were indestructible?

#38 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 10 July 2011 - 08:12 PM

If angels had gender and the parts to reproduce, do you think that goes on in Heaven?

The Garden was a representation of Heaven on earth. It is why God was able to walk with Adam and Eve. And why it was separated from the rest of the world. Did God walk with them after they sinned? No, because what Heaven requires was destroyed by sin.

Just to show you how sin cannot be in the presence of God. The Priests in the old covenant had to separate themselves from everyone before entering the Holy of Holies. Before the Priest entered where God dwelled, a rope was tied around the ankle just in case the Priest was struck dead for entering the presence of God with sin upon his heart. The rope was insurance that the dead body could be removed without God striking anyone else dead

If sin causes death, and death did not come until after sin: rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Then all created before the first sin were created to live forever. A world populated with people who can reproduce and live forever will eventually do what?

So the world without sin is where reproduction is replace by creation.
And the world with sin has creation replaced with reproduction.

If you don't believe that, then show me when anything was created after sin?

As far as S@xual attraction goes, you are forgetting who and what God is. Your logic of how the creation works has to be consistent with who God is, and what God can and cannot do. If you apply to His creation what God cannot do, then you take away the reason God is righteous and Holy. This is the reason you misunderstand, you are not applying these things and instead saying that God can do anything (including sin). There are boundaries for God to be able to stay within what He represents. After all, how can a unrighteous judge, judge us for what He cannot even do Himself? Your ideas of creation bring God down to the level of man. We were created in God's image, we were not created as God's ourselves. In fact the Bible makes it very clear that we were created a little lower than the angels. Is God also on that level?

And why did not Adam know Eve (as the Bible puts it) before sin, why only after sin? Which by the way supports what I am saying. An imperfect creation equals an imperfect God. It is by man's choice that makes God the "indirect" Creator of sin.

Do you believe that God can sin or break His own laws because He is God?

#39 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 11 July 2011 - 07:10 AM

I lean toward young earthness, but I think the old earthers bring up some valid biblical objections to a young earth. I guess I'm a middle earther right now (heh heh).

This is me as well. I was using the term Agnostic Creationist but I like middle earther. :lol: We could start using it regularly and maybe it will catch on. :P

#40 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 11 July 2011 - 10:56 AM

I lean toward young earthness, but I think the old earthers bring up some valid biblical objections to a young earth. I guess I'm a middle earther right now (heh heh).


The way I view this is similar to how I view other theological debates - if the preponderance of the scripture points to one side and any alleged problem scriptures can at least be be accommodated, does't it make more sense to go with that viewpoint? I believe there is a huge gap between a literal interpretation of Genesis (6 days, global flood), and a poetic or old-earth, local flood view. There is an impressive statistical analysis of this in the last chapter of the ICR RATE book, volume II (note that this is a stringently peer-reviewed, serious work by ICR). I wish this chapter was available online. To summarize, the author analyzed the preterite verb form in Genesis 1 through 2:3 and convincingly showed that there is only a 1 in 10,000 chance that Genesis 1 can be taken any other way than a literal narrative. This doesn't even include the huge scriptural problems with a local flood, for which there is literally no scripture evidence to support such a notion. So, not only is there little old earth support in the Bible, adhering to such a belief requires you to carry the baggage of also rejecting a global flood (virtually all old earthers now reject a global flood, the gap theory is pretty much dead other than a few stragglers).

Here is another problem with old earth:

Are thorns the result of the fall? If yes, how do you explain them from an OEC perspective, since we find thorns in the fossil record?

Fred




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users