REPLYING TO GOOD BROTHER'S TWO QUESTIONS:
Death before the fall
I rarely do much extensive reading deep into the threads. (I tend to see only the most recent posts.) So I'm surprised I found these questions directed at me from GOOD BROTHER. But because his interpretations about the fall and death before the fall have become prominent in the American evangelical world in recent decades, they merit a thorough refutation. Therefore, the questions I pose to Good Brother following my answers to his questions are directed at anyone and everyone who holds to his church's traditions.
(And if someone wants a response to their rebuttal, I will only bother if you make an actual argument using scriptural evidence. Simply relying on traditional mantras alone, such as "That's not what the Bible says" or "You are a Child of Satan", do not constitute arguments from scripture. And they certainly don't merit a response. So if you are not on my automated ignore list but I didn't respond to you, it is because your counter-argument lacked credence and doesn't need a reply in order to dismiss it. Indeed, I don't bother with completing the reading of posts which have nothing viable to say.)
If evolution is true, then death is in the world long before humans. That is in stark contrast to what the Scriptures say. The Bible says that death entered by the sin of one man.
How do you "harmonize" that?
Very easily.
You have replaced what the Bible says with what your tradition says.
The Bible says that HUMAN DEATH entered humanity by the sin of one man.
Only your TRADITIONS say that ALL DEATH (not just human death) came from the fall.
Theologians have understood this for millennia. But in recent decades this man-made tradition has become an important principle of creation science and that's why you believe it. You couldn't have found it in the bible because there is no such statement.
[Take a look at your favorite proof texts which talk about death coming through sin.
ALL of them talk about HUMAN DEATH.]
If evolution is true, then thorns and thistles have existed for millions of years (as evidenced in the fossil record), while the Scriptures say that thorns and thistles only came about after the sin of one man and the subsequent curse placed upon all the earth and inhabitants thereof.
How do you harmonize that?
Once again you have replaced the scriptures with your favorite traditions.
In the garden (in a region called Eden) man was in a special "ecology" which God created as a place where man could thrive and experience a close relationship with God. The Tree of Life prevented his aging and death. Aging and death existed only OUTSIDE of the garden, where there was NO ACCESS to the Tree of Life. [And that is why AFTER the fall, the swords and angels prevented a RETURN to the garden and the Tree of Life. Why would Adam and Eve try to return to the garden? To get away from the thistles and thorns of the outside wrld and eat of the fruit of the Tree of Life and thereby escape their natural propensity toward death, which existed in them all along!]
But sin sent Adam and Eve outside of the garden where they joined the harsh world which had existed all along: a world of where man would experience death, disease, disability and even things like weeds which made the cultivation of his food crops far more difficult. Thorns and thistles constituted problems they hadn't faced in the garden preserve.
"And the Lord God planted a garden eastward, in Eden" indicates that
not all of the earth was a garden paradise, even before the fall. God didn't place the man in a typical place in Creation. God planted a special garden as an atypical paradise for the man. So it protected man from the DEATH AND DISEASE THAT EXISTED OUTSIDE OF THE GARDEN!
If ALL of the earth was a garden paradise, God wouldn't have had any reason to plant a garden in Eden for the man! God planted that garden and placed THE TREE OF LIFE there so that the fruit would prevent Adam from dying of old age as did the animals outside of that garden in Eden!
----> Tell me, good brother, if death didn't exist at that time, why did God place a Tree of Life in the garden which would PREVENT the man's death? (Why PREVENT something if it doesn't even EXIST?) If death didn't exist anywhere on the planet (among any animal), why was the Tree of Life necessary? And if the animals weren't dying at that time, was that because God provided a Tree of Life everywhere on the earth so that the animals could eat its fruit and avoid death?
You see, the problem with replacing the Bible with your church's favorite traditions is the Bible stops making sense. You are forced to invent various "doctrines" in order to deal with the contradictions which your traditions create.
How do YOU harmonize the contradictions your interpretations create? (Including the enormous contradictions of a creation filled with evidence which denies your interpretations of the Bible.............but not the Bible itself?) Tell me!
I answered YOUR questions, so I want you to answer mine:
1) Where does the Bible say that NO ANIMALS died prior to the fall?
2) If no death at all was in the world prior to the fall, why was a Tree of Life necessary? Why did Adam and Eve have to eat the fruit of the Tree of Life to stay alive and avoid aging?
For the Tree of Life to be NECESSARY, Adam and Eve had to already possess the capacity for death, right? If there was NO DEATH IN THE WORLD, why bother with its antidote? [And why would they try to return to the Tree of Life after the fall if it didn't still have that attribute of "curing them from death and aging"? Just like before!]
3) And where does the Bible say that multiple Trees of Life existed throughout the planet to prevent animal death?
4)
Where does the Bible say that AFTER the fall, God produced a NEW CREATION where death was introduced to animals for the first time? And where God created thistles and thorns for the first time? Did that second creation produce carnivorous animals (and even carnivorous plants and parasites?) Did that second creation produce carnivorous jaws and digestive systems? Did that creation produce scavengers of dead bodies, such as vultures and Parana fish? [And I don't know if you are among the YECs who claim that God didn't create the Laws of Thermodynamics until after the fall. I hope not. Because that would mean that Adam couldn't digest his food nor walk without slipping---seeing how friction would be a form of "decay" that couldn't exist without the L.O.T. Even many YECs leaders are starting to realize how SILLY that 1960's creation science tradition had become. Do you reject it?]
5)
Why does the Bible harmonize with the evidence we find today in God's Creation but your traditions and interpretations do NOT harmonize with that evidence?
6)
Where does the Bible say that no thorns and thistles existed before the fall?
7) And even you admitted above that "thorns and thistles have existed for millions of years (
as evidenced in the fossil record)", so
why do you think God would fill his creation with evidence that contradicts your Bible interpretations? [As you've pointed out, regardless of whether evolution is true, the fossil record tells us that thorns and thistles existed for millions of years.]
Was God being deceptive? Or just testing your faith? [Of course, if you actually focus on what the Bible says----that the thorns and thistles existed OUTSIDE THE GARDEN [that is why the outside world was NOT a garden!]----then there is no problem with the Bible versus Creation!
8)
Why do you pretend that the entire earth was a death-less paradise before the fall? The Bible never says it was. (Only your traditions say that.) It simply said it was very good, which in Hebrew is just as "generic" and non-superlative as it is in English. (
Genesis does NOT use the Hebrew word for "perfect" or "without anything negative or unpleasant.) Of course, animal death in any ecological system IS very good, because it prevents over consumption of resources and predation culls out the weakest of the populations. Why not believe what the Bible actually says? Your interpretations and traditions are creating your frustrations and contradictions.
9) And why do you pretend that the fall of Adam and Eve was the first act of rebellion against God on the earth? Do you not agree that Satan (as the serpent) experienced a fall of his own first, when he rebelled against God? Are we agreed on that?
So if sinful Satan was already on the earth, would you really expect the entire earth to be an idyllic paradise, rather than just the garden paradise? (I assume you believe the Bible when it says that Satan is "the prince of the power of the air" and that Satan truly OWNED the earth's kingdoms that he offered Jesus in the temptation.
So why would you think that the world outside of Eden would be so "perfect" and without death when Satan controlled it as an aftermath of HIS fall?)
You are trying to live as a double-minded man, because it is only your TRADITIONS which create the problems you've brought up.
If you put aside your church's traditions and focus on the Bible instead, all of your contradictions go away! I truly wish for you that kind of peace and harmony. You don't have to live with such contradictions and you don't have to experience the embarrassment of having both Christians and non-Christians looking at you with sadness and surprise----all because you keep rejecting the fact that God's Creation (explained through science) and God's Bible (explained through theology) are in harmony and not contradiction.
God isn't trying to deceive you or force you to live with unresolvable contradictions! You needn't deny and ignore the enormous quantities of evidence for an old earth and evolutionary processes which God has provided throughout his Creation in order to answer your questions! The contempt you receive from non-believers is NOT because of the Bible; it is because you are defending man-made traditions which CANNOT be rationally defended. (And deep down, you know that. Believe, as a former young earth creationist, I understand the peer-pressure and even the fact that if you come to terms with what the Bible actually says, you will most likely lose your job and have to find another church. Tradition is a very strong force. And that is why Jesus and the Apostle Paul were constantly being opposed by tradition. And Pharisees did not only exist in the first century. We see them on this forum regularly. Notice how many insist that "you can't be a true Christian and be a true evolutionist" and other similar nonsense. The reason they have to constantly lie about evolution and what the theory states is that they know that they can't deny it if they were honest about it.)
Jesus said, "I am the way, the TRUTH, and the life." As a Christian, I assume you believe that Jesus is the LOGOS. He is the truth behind the creation. When you accept what that creation tells you, you are accepting Christ's work!
You don't have to pretend that God's Bible is an honest statement of truth but God's Creation is not. Accept both as God's work and you will find them in perfect harmony.
Any research or support that a creationist may present could not possibly be worse than the misrepresentation and instability evolutionists have to offer.What research?
