Food and Original Sin

[no1nose]

Please have a watch of this video and let's talk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUX8hGBFdWc

 

[elopez]

All of the names of the animals Adam gave described them as being violent. For example "hawk" means "bird of prey." That hardly supports the idea of all animals have a vegetarian diet. Most animals would have died if that were the case...

 

[no1nose]

All of the names of the animals Adam gave described them as being violent. For example "hawk" means "bird of prey." That hardly supports the idea of all animals have a vegetarian diet. Most animals would have died if that were the case...

Thanks for that. I can see a couple of problems with what you are saying.

Firstly, one must assume that Adam and Eve spoke Hebrew

- for example the word "hawk" first occurs in Lev 11:16. The confusion of tongues at the tower of Babel seem to indicate that mankind's original language was lost.

Secondly the Genesis 1:30 tells us exactly what was food for animals:

"And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so."

Also see 7:28 in the video.

Finally animals in the Garden didn't need to be predators Take, for example the lion. Though it seems impossible, cats, humans and horses all share the same type of digestive system, and all three have an appendix (cecum). The appendix is not used in humans and cats whereas in animals such as horses it is enlarged and allows them to be complete herbivores. The presence of an unused appendix in carnivorous animals shows that they could have once been herbivores. And since the appendix is still present it could be enlarged and allow the animal again to be a herbivore.

Or as Isaiah said:

The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD. Isa 65:25

 

[elopez]

Firstly, one must assume that Adam and Eve spoke Hebrew

- for example the word "hawk" first occurs in Lev 11:16. The confusion of tongues at the tower of Babel seem to indicate that mankind's original language was lost.

Not even. One only need assume that the meanings of the name remained the same, which there is no reason to assume they did not. Adam named the animals after the behavior he witnessed. Of course they spoke a different language, but that doesn't imply the meanings of the names have changed.

Secondly the Genesis 1:30 tells us exactly what was food for animals:

"And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so."

The grass was made for the inferior animals. This text does not even say animals ate only plants, or that lions are any other carnivorous animals ate plants.

Also see 7:28 in the video.

Why not give a synopsis of what the video says?

Finally animals in the Garden didn't need to be predators Take, for example the lion. Though it seems impossible, cats, humans and horses all share the same type of digestive system, and all three have an appendix (cecum). The appendix is not used in humans and cats whereas in animals such as horses it is enlarged and allows them to be complete herbivores. The presence of an unused appendix in carnivorous animals shows that they could have once been herbivores. And since the appendix is still present it could be enlarged and allow the animal again to be a herbivore.

First, I would invite you to share the source which claims lions were once herbivores, that they share the same type of digestive system as humans, as well as the other mendacious claims here. I can tell you now you will find no credible source that confirms what you're saying, other than some YEC website. Any other scientific website will tell you that lions cannot digest plants, and never could. They eat grass so they can throw up, which is why you see indoor cats eating it, then throwing it up. Their digestive system is not made to digest plants which is why they end up throwing up grass.

 

[no1nose]

Not even. One only need assume that the meanings of the name remained the same, which there is no reason to assume they did not. Adam named the animals after the behavior he witnessed. Of course they spoke a different language, but that doesn't imply the meanings of the names have changed.

Words often change their meanings for example take the words "cool" and "gay" now have meanings they didn't have 60 years ago



First, I would invite you to share the source which claims lions were once herbivores, that they share the same type of digestive system as humans, as well as the other mendacious claims here. I can tell you now you will find no credible source that confirms what you're saying, other than some YEC website. Any other scientific website will tell you that lions cannot digest plants, and never could. They eat grass so they can throw up, which is why you see indoor cats eating it, then throwing it up. Their digestive system is not made to digest plants which is why they end up throwing up grass.

Please google " horse cecum" or "cat cecum". I did:

Horse: Digestive Function of Horses
Cat: Anatomy of the cecum of the cat. [Anat Embryol (Berl). 1984] - PubMed - NCBI

 

[elopez]

Please google " horse cecum" or "cat cecum". I did:

Horse: Digestive Function of Horses
Cat: Anatomy of the cecum of the cat. [Anat Embryol (Berl). 1984] - PubMed - NCBI

None of that refutes anything I said. Nice try though.

 

[holyrokker]

"In the Garden of Eden death was completely unknown."

Really?

So when God told Adam (regarding the "forbidden fruit"), "On the day you eat of it, you will surely die.", how did Adam know what God meant by "die"? If there had been no death, Adam couldn't have understood the concept.

 

[no1nose]

"In the Garden of Eden death was completely unknown."

Really?

So when God told Adam (regarding the "forbidden fruit"), "On the day you eat of it, you will surely die.", how did Adam know what God meant by "die"? If there had been no death, Adam couldn't have understood the concept.

You have a point there. Death was something that was a potential but not a reality for him. Adam could have understood that.

Also from another perspective when God said what would be food (Gen 1:29-30) he didn't include fish. Fish do not breathe air and represent death (existence without true life to be exact) in the Bible. It would seem that fish have always eaten other fish and from this Adam could have learned what death was.

Be a fisherman - pulling people from sin and death to true life and spirit!

 

[enlightened1]

Although there is truth in the video, there are things I do disagree with, most particularly, the premise that the Forbidden fruit did not have any seeds. The way I interpret the Forbidden tree is that it is the Tree of Life, as is also the one growing next to it, which tree Adam was allowed to eat from freely by the Commandment. To this end then, the Tree of Life appears as two trees, and Adam really was not forbidden from anything in the Garden, because the fruit he could not eat from the one tree (the one forbidden), he could freely eat from the other tree. I interpret it this way based upon GEN 2:9 and REV 22:2-3, where the latter describes the Tree of Life as being a tree that appears on both sides of the 'River of Life', which, by necessity, means it must appear as two trees separated by the river. Therefore, since the Garden is an eternal place, the two trees in REV must be the same two trees in GEN.

If this is the TRUTH (which I believe it to be), then clearly, as long as Adam came to the center of the Garden and ate from the tree allowed, but did not eat from the one forbidden, his conscience was clear, and he knew he was doing good: hence the Knowledge of Good. However, on the day he did eat from the one forbidden, his conscience was immediately convicted of doing sin, and he gained the Knowledge of Evil. Therefore, the forbidden tree was justly named, and Adam died to get something he already had! How pathetic and tragic, but it speaks volumes to me on the true nature of man,