If there was no death (of animals) before the Fall, then why would animals need to eat?

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Where in the Bible does it say there was no death before "the fall?"

First God declared the creation very good. Not good by human standards but tôb meōd
Exceedingly good by Gods standards.
If the creation had been built upon old bones or if the tiger he just created could catch and kill the rabbit next to it, that would not have met those standards.

Then we are told the animals, all of them, were given plants for food.
Genesis 1
30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

They were not eating each other and were of no danger to man or man to them.

We are given a glimpses of both Eden and the New World that God plans after the second coming of Christ.
Isaiah 65:25
The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox

Then we are told sin brought in death
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

1 Corinthians 15:21
For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.

There was no death where there was no sin. They are completely linked. Sin-then death.


And this is not just spiritual death or God would not have also told them about their physical deaths.
17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”


Returning to dust was part of the curse.

Later on the the Bible we are told the earth will be restored. Restored back to what? Death and survival of the fittest? No, back to Eden, but an Eden that cannot be corrupted.
It isn't just us who are restored and redeemed but the world also.
Heaven is not the final destination, just the waiting room, waiting for God to destroy the world by fire and remake it back to what it was.
Romans 8:18-23
9 For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
Aug 19, 2018
15,872
10,743
71
Bondi
✟252,574.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
First God declared the creation very good. Not good by human standards but tôb meōd
Exceedingly good by Gods standards.

That makes no sense. It's a comparative statement. If true then He could have created a world that was less than exceedingly good.
 
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That makes no sense. It's a comparative statement. If true then He could have created a world that was less than exceedingly good.


My reply was to questionman because they have Protestant as a label. That tells me that they believe in God. So based on that, they may also believe in scripture since one tends to go with the other. Not always but often enough.

We know it was very good because he tells us just that.
Those who trust the Lord trust his word because it is Jesus speaking.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
Aug 19, 2018
15,872
10,743
71
Bondi
✟252,574.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
My reply was to questionman because they have Protestant as a label. That tells me that they believe in God. So based on that, they may also believe in scripture since one tends to go with the other. Not always but often enough.

We know it was very good because he tells us just that.
Those who trust the Lord trust his word because it is Jesus speaking.

Again, 'very good' is a comparative term. It's not applicable to anything that God does.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,015
51,487
Guam
✟4,905,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
And this is not just spiritual death or God would not have also told them about their physical deaths.
Indeed.

And God refers to death as His enemy.

1 Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: coffee4u
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Site Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
See title.

Animals eat for the purpose of providing nutrients for the replenishment of energy stores, cellular rejuvenation, and so on. If an animal stops eating, metabolic processes no longer have the 'fuel' required to function and the animal eventually dies.

According to creationists there was no death before the Fall. If animals were no longer in danger of starving to death then why would there be a need to eat?

I don’t know what creationists believe about this, but it’s not an idea that’s actually in the text. Putting aside any allegorical significance, the text doesn’t claim directly that either people or animals were immortal. What inferences are made depends on factors that aren’t in the text.

Death is first mentioned here -

“God commanded the man…but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

In a slight Chinese whispers twist, the man passes this onto the woman who gives her version to the dragon:

“The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ ”

This is the first time death comes up, but there is nothing in the text to indicate the man and woman would not eventually die anyway. Putting aside the question of what is actually meant by death here - which gets into the purpose of the story - the idea that humans were immortal is an assumption based on what isn’t in the text, not on what is.

The actual result of their eating from the tree is that their ‘eyes are opened’, whatever is meant by that.

The consequences or punishment for eating from the tree are listed, the part delivered to Adam includes a mention of death:

“To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.””

‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:17-19‬ ‭NIV‬‬

But there is no suggestion that Adam would not have returned to the dust in any case, and nothing anywhere about immortal animals. In this passage ‘cursed is the ground’ is linked to ‘because…you ate…’, but ‘for dust you are and to dust you wil return’ is an indicative statement, there is no ‘now that you have eaten the forbidden fruit’ between its two clauses.

This following passage:

“The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.””

‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:21-22‬ ‭NIV‬‬

Indicates that the humans were not destined to live forever. Thus the only passage that mentions this idea is in the negative.

That’s the humans, there’s nothing in there about animals not dying.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,015
51,487
Guam
✟4,905,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I like that He punished the snake by only allowing it to crawl on it's belly. The snake must have been: 'Wha..?'
God made the serpent an archetype of Satan, making it eat dust for the rest of its life.

Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

Factor in the fact that we were made of dust ...

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

And we see, at least in type, that Satan wants to devour us.

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
Aug 19, 2018
15,872
10,743
71
Bondi
✟252,574.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
God made the serpent an archetype of Satan, making it eat dust for the rest of its life.

Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

Factor in the fact that we were made of dust ...

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

And we see, at least in type, that Satan wants to devour us.

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
Snakes eat dust? I didn't know...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,015
51,487
Guam
✟4,905,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Mmm. Me neither. So maybe the story was allegorical.
Or maybe just the one animal was cursed?

For the record, I like to think it was a dragon, since God refers to Satan as "that old dragon."

The way I see it ... and this is just pure speculation ... is that Eve's favorite pet was a dragon.

Satan entered that dragon and talked to her in the Garden.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
We know it was very good because he tells us just that.
I have heard that what God does is perfectly 'good' by definition (because He says so!), so whatever He does, even if horrific to us, is 'very good'. It makes the meaning of 'good' entirely arbitrary as far as humans are concerned; 'What God does is good' just becomes, 'What God does is what God does'.

Since what God does also (according to the bible) involves acts forbidden to humans unless explicitly instructed by God (e.g. 'Thou shalt not kill'), there is not just a dualist metaphysics in such religious belief, but dualist morals & ethics, i.e. "Do what I say, not what I do (even though what I do is, by definition, perfectly good)".
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,015
51,487
Guam
✟4,905,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Since what God does also (according to the bible) involves acts forbidden to humans unless explicitly instructed by God (e.g. 'Thou shalt not kill'), there is not just a dualist metaphysics in such religious belief, but dualist morals & ethics, i.e. "Do what I say, not what I do (even though what I do is, by definition, perfectly good)".
Either that, or you don't know the whole story like God, who is omniscient, does.

What first appears as wrong, will in the long run, be right.

Riddle:

If you don't like this place, it's better to stay a year than a day. If you do like it, it's better to stay a day, than a year. What is this place?

Venus
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
Either that, or you don't know the whole story like God, who is omniscient, does.

What first appears as wrong, will in the long run, be right.
Nevertheless, the moral/ethical dualism applies, and the arbitrariness of 'good' means conscience is not a reliable guide.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums