Is physical death part of God's original design

SBG · May 24, 2005

Where do you stand on physical death and why? Please provide Scriptural references if you can.

Marshall Janzen · May 24, 2005

Do you mean physical death of plants, animals or humans?

Marshall Janzen · May 24, 2005

Option four: Humans fell, and this caused creation to be subject to an immoral ruler (Genesis 1:26-28; Psalm 8:4-8; Romans 8:19-21). Physical death of animals and plants is an integral part of God's creation as he made it in his wisdom (Psalm 104:19-31; Job 38:39-39:18). Humans would also naturally die from the beginning if not supernaturally sustained by God (Genesis 2:8-9; 3:22-24).

Evee · May 24, 2005

I didn't vote because none seem to really fit my view.
I am really not excited about dying but it doesn't matter it will happen regardless.
Oh I went back and voted I never read closely.
I believe death followed Adam and Eve's fall.

angela 2 · May 24, 2005

SBG said:
Where do you stand on physical death and why? Please provide Scriptural references if you can.

Paul writes in Romans that death came into the world with sin. Some interpet this as meaning spiritual death which I'm sure is included, but I see no reason to spiritualize this passage entirely.

rmwilliamsll · May 24, 2005

The issue is theodicy.
Face it, moving it around in time (pre infra post lapsarian) doesnt change the issue.
is God the author of evil?
did God cause sin to enter the world?
if God is all-powerful, why doesn't He destroy evil?
if God is all-good, why does evil exist?

playing word games, like the YECists do, trying to force the red team(OEC's) to solve the unsolvable problem of theodicy as a subtopic of the age of the world is simply dumb. it deserves better.

...

Vance · May 24, 2005

Did Jesus come to undo the "death" that occurred at the Fall and to provide a redemption from that "death"? Yes. Do those who accept this redemptive gift still die physically? Yes. So, it can't be referring to physical death, since that means that Jesus' redemptive sacrifice was a futile effort, and we know that is not true. It would mean it didn't work. Instead, let's consider what Adam and Eve actually suffered "on that day" and what those who accept the redemptive gift actually receive. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden, thus losing full communion with God. That is Spiritual Death. And what do we obtain when we accept that gift of redemptive sacrifice? We get a renewed communion with God, which is Spiritual Life!

And this is for eternity, which has nothing to do with physical immortality. We know that both the redeemed and damned will have eternal physical life, it is just a matter of where that eternity will be spent. For those who have been redeemed from the Fall, they will spend it in God's presence, thus in eternal Spiritual Life. Those who are not redeemed will spend it out of God's presence, thus in Spiritual Death.

So, there is every reason in the world to "spiritualize" this passage.

SBG · May 24, 2005

Vance said:
Did Jesus come to undo the "death" that occurred at the Fall and to provide a redemption from that "death"? Yes.

Yes, He did. We agree!

Vance said:
Do those who accept this redemptive gift still die physically? Yes.

Yes, we do. We agree again!!

Vance said:
So, it can't be referring to physical death, since that means that Jesus' redemptive sacrifice was a futile effort, and we know that is not true. It would mean it didn't work.

Now, we disagree. You see, TEs problem with this - when taking this view point - is that they don't look at the whole picture of what Jesus Christ did. They only see the Cross and nothing else.

The Cross is incredibly important, but it isn't everything that Jesus did for our Redemption. On the Cross, Jesus changed the way things were. If we believe in Him and follow Him, He will cover our sinfulness with His Blood so that God doesn't see our sin, thus He can look upon us. This gives us eternal life. This is the first part of our Redemption.

Paul states that if Jesus didn't raise from the dead, then we have no hope. Paul then goes on to state that we will receive uncorruptable bodies that will live forever, when Jesus returns.

When Jesus rose from the dead, He showed the completion of our redemption. We too will receive a body that will live forever, just as Christ received one. This demonstrates the second part of Redemption.

The Bible teaches that when Jesus Christ comes, He will restore all things(Acts 3:21). In order to restore all things, there must have been a previous state of existence that was untainted. The Bible teaches that one of the things that will be restored is our bodies. We will receive bodies that will be uncorrupted and immortal.(1 Corin. 15:35-58)

Why do we still die physically, if Jesus did redeem us spiritually and physically? We still die because we are still in sin. We have been saved by the Grace of God, but we are still with sin. The consequence of sin, is death, physical death. For those who don't turn to Jesus and accept Him, their consequence is even far greater, for they will receive the second death, permanent separation from God.

Death is not separation from God. Only the second death is separation from God, because it is permanent. (Lake of Fire) Sin is the cause of separation between mankind and God. Death(physical) is a consequence of Sin. The Second Death is the permanent separation from God.

Sin is an actual human condition that has been passed on since Adam and Eve. We are born sinful. (Psalms 58:3)

Physical death was brought in by sin, it was never part of God's original creation.

Sin is the separation from God.
Physical Death is the consequence of sin.
The Second Death is the permanent separation from God.

The Bible teaches that Sin is the cause of the separation between man and God because God cannot look upon sin.

Vance said:
Instead, let's consider what Adam and Eve actually suffered "on that day" and what those who accept the redemptive gift actually receive.

A transliteral interpretation of the Hebrew says 'in that day' not 'on that day.' In that day refers to, in that day of sin, you will now physically die. This is followed up in Genesis 3:19 where God tells Adam he will now be subjected to physical death.

Vance said:
Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden, thus losing full communion with God. That is Spiritual Death. And what do we obtain when we accept that gift of redemptive sacrifice? We get a renewed communion with God, which is Spiritual Life!

They were not only kicked out, but also told they will return to the dust from which they were made. Make not mistake, sin is the cause of the separation between man and God. Physical death is the consequence of sin. And Spiritual death - the second death - is the permanent separation from God.

And not only do we receive eternal life from God, but we will receive immortal bodies from Jesus when He returns. You must not forget that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, thus completing the Redemption of mankind. This is highly significant and is often over-looked, as we see here.

On the Cross, His blood was shed to cover our sins so that God can look upon us and not see our sins. The resurrection shows that we too will receive bodies like Christ's that are immortal, thus completing our Redemption. Paul argued vigorously on this point in his letters. Don't over look it.

We physically die because we are still sinful. We are not sinless now that we have accepted and follow Jesus Christ! But because of our sin, we must die and be made anew, just as Jesus was. Jesus teaches this.

Even though we have accepted Jesus Christ, we still must pay for our sins. God is a just God, and because He stays the same, we still die physically, as the consequence to our sins.(Romans 8:10) But God will raise our bodies and give us uncorrupted bodies that will be immortal.

Vance said:
And this is for eternity, which has nothing to do with physical immortality.

This is not what Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 15:32-58.

1 Corinthians 15:51-54
"51Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed 52in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory.""

Vance said:
We know that both the redeemed and damned will have eternal physical life, it is just a matter of where that eternity will be spent. For those who have been redeemed from the Fall, they will spend it in God's presence, thus in eternal Spiritual Life. Those who are not redeemed will spend it out of God's presence, thus in Spiritual Death.

Can you point to the passage that says those who didn't accept Christ receive an immortal body?

Vance said:
So, there is every reason in the world to "spiritualize" this passage.

Yes, we should, but after we have understood its actual meaning.

Scholar in training · May 24, 2005

Just to clarify: theistic evolution doesn't jive with a literal Fall at all. Literal death before the Fall might perhaps be understandable, but a literal Adam and Eve with evolution? It doesn't make sense. If evolution is true, then there would be many humans by the time Adam and Eve would have been on the scene; evolution completely contradicts a literal Fall. Anyone who tries to get around this is fooling himself.

rmwilliamsll · May 24, 2005

Scholar in training said:
Just to clarify: theistic evolution doesn't jive with a literal Fall at all. Literal death before the Fall might perhaps be understandable, but a literal Adam and Eve with evolution? It doesn't make sense. If evolution is true, then there would be many humans by the time Adam and Eve would have been on the scene; evolution completely contradicts a literal Fall. Anyone who tries to get around this is fooling himself.

obviously you are unaware of Glenn Morton's work, Dick Fisher, Terry Gray, then there was BB.Warfield and a host of late 19thC theologians etc., (as outlined in Darwin's forgotten defenders) and many others.

your error is to confuse your ignorance with logical necessity. a shame, for education and a little googling could fix that condition.

....

Scholar in training · May 24, 2005

rmwilliamsll said:
obviously you are unaware of Glenn Morton's work, Dick Fisher, Terry Gray, then there was BB.Warfield and a host of late 19thC theologians etc., (as outlined in Darwin's forgotten defenders) and many others.

your error is to confuse your ignorance with logical necessity. a shame, for education and a little googling could fix that condition.

Tell me, then, what these arguments are. Do you mean the argument voiced on this web site, that there is ample room for compromise between evolution and creation?

"We give up some clarity about exactly when and where the Fall of Mankind happened. We do not give up the idea of a literal Fall. Although some theistic evolutionists may contend that the literal Fall is collective, there is ample room and reason to contend that the Fall happened to a single pair of historical individuals named Adam and Eve in a place called the Garden of Eden."

Oh, I see. No problem. Ditch the idea that Adam and Eve were the first human beings, but keep the literal Fall. Now, if you'd be willing to explain how that makes any sense (and how picking and choosing which parts of the creation story we agree with is a logical exercise), I'd be willing to hear it.

Delta One · May 25, 2005

Mercury,

Do you mean physical death of plants, animals or humans?

Animals and humans - God told everything to eat plants and fruit, i.e. vegetarian. It was not until the time of Noah that man was given permission to eat meat.

rmwilliamsll · May 25, 2005

i will again, reinterate the fact that there is a wide spectrum of ideas covered by the label--TE.

you have a number of ways to see Adam and Eve as historical individuals yet still see evolutionary theory as good science.
regarding the creation of Adam
1)God took the pattern for Adam from the pre-Adamites
2)God took a particular pre-Adamite and reshaped him into Adam
the only biological requirement is continuity with living things.
the best place to read on this is Terry Gray's church trial.

the issue of federal headship is much harder to work out acceptable details.
1)two Adams, one generic in Gen1, one specific in Gen 2-5
2)the one in Gen 2-5 existed 5-10K years ago, here is where you need to look at Glen Morton's work vs. Dick Fisher, young Adam or old Adam? (Stephen Jones is another 2 adams online writer)
3)Adam is the first human being to be in intimate contact with God in the Garden, whether you add that as a new capacity or not with Adam doesn't seem to matter.
4)God chooses to see all mankind in Adam, the essence of federal headship.
5)another difference crops up in whether Adam is the ancestor of all modern men at that point or just the ancestor of the Israelites.
this is a big point of difference between Glen and i for instance, the dating of the Adam in Gen 2-5

but in all cases listed above, all the proponents are fully orthodox, believing in a historical Adam, federal headship and all the other essential doctrines found in Gen. BB. Warfield is another theologican to consult on this, earlier is more evolutionary, later Warfield backs off some ideas as too hard to justify with Gen.

....

Marshall Janzen · May 25, 2005

Delta One said:
God told everything to eat plants and fruit, i.e. vegetarian. It was not until the time of Noah that man was given permission to eat meat.

No, God told the land animals, birds and humans that they were given every green plant and the fruit of every tree for food. Fish are conspicuously absent and not given any food source, so obviously not all food sources are mentioned. After the flood, God did not give permission to the animals to eat anything different than they had eaten before.

I outlined my own perspective on the issue in detail in post #33 of this thread. I'm agnostic about human physical death before the Fall, but I think the Bible is quite clear that animal death was part of God's good creation. I'd welcome further critical discussion of that post in that thread, since the only other person to try got tired after one post and gave up.

MidnightBlue · May 25, 2005

Scholar in training said:
Just to clarify: theistic evolution doesn't jive with a literal Fall at all.

I don't personally believe in a literal Fall. However, a good many people who believe in theistic evolution do believe in a literal Fall, and there's nothing inherently contradictory about that. Many of them also believe in two very real individuals called Adam and Eve who experienced that Fall.

Why do you think it's impossible to reconcile those beliefs to theistic evolution?

shernren · May 25, 2005

I'm sure that animal and plant death must have been around pre-Fall. Even a literal reading with some common sense will tell you that any animal population that has reproduction without death has a potentially infinite population, and I don't think that was in God's plan

I think the options in the survey may have been a little simplistic. And I think that yes, the theories that link evolution to a literal Fall are found faulty on the principle of parsimony (when a number of theories equally well explain the evidence, the simpler one is better), but this once I close my philosophical eyes.

Vance · May 25, 2005

Scholar in Training, before pontificating on what is possible or not possible, you should do what your name suggests, and study to show thyself approved. Maybe read up on what TE's believe and why. And maybe with a bit more humility in your own omniscience on these matters.

Here is a place to start:

http://www.christianforums.com/t1133651-what-is-theistic-evolution-an-explanation.html

angela 2 · May 25, 2005

I'm not sure how we are defining "literal" as in literal Fall. However, it is not essential to believe everyy word of Genesis is literal to believe that death came into the world with sin.

angela 2 · May 25, 2005

Vance said:
Did Jesus come to undo the "death" that occurred at the Fall and to provide a redemption from that "death"? Yes. Do those who accept this redemptive gift still die physically? Yes. So, it can't be referring to physical death, since that means that Jesus' redemptive sacrifice was a futile effort, and we know that is not true. It would mean it didn't work. Instead, let's consider what Adam and Eve actually suffered "on that day" and what those who accept the redemptive gift actually receive. Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden, thus losing full communion with God. That is Spiritual Death. And what do we obtain when we accept that gift of redemptive sacrifice? We get a renewed communion with God, which is Spiritual Life!

And this is for eternity, which has nothing to do with physical immortality. We know that both the redeemed and damned will have eternal physical life, it is just a matter of where that eternity will be spent. For those who have been redeemed from the Fall, they will spend it in God's presence, thus in eternal Spiritual Life. Those who are not redeemed will spend it out of God's presence, thus in Spiritual Death.

So, there is every reason in the world to "spiritualize" this passage.

I love it! A pefect example of drawing conclusing on the basis of one's own assumptions.

But if I say that Christ redeemed us from sin, death and evil where are you now?

Of course, we all die. But Paul assures us that the dead will be raised just as Jesus Christ was raised. It is the resurrection to new life that Christ obtained for us, not immortality.

Vance · May 25, 2005

angela 2 said:
I love it! A pefect example of drawing conclusing on the basis of one's own assumptions.

But if I say that Christ redeemed us from sin, death and evil where are you now?

Of course, we all die. But Paul assures us that the dead will be raised just as Jesus Christ was raised. It is the resurrection to new life that Christ obtained for us, not immortality.

Yes, Jesus redeems us from sin (which is evil), and into life, which is the opposite of death. Yes, I agree with that completely. The question is what type of death we are referring to. Yes, all the dead will be raised, but that is both the redeemed and the unredeemed alike. We will all face Judgment and eternal physical life. And that "new life" you refer to is spiritual life, full communion with God.

And, yes, death was originally, and still is, the result of sin. But again, which type of death do we suffer as a result of sin? What type of death is the punishment for sin? What type of death did Jesus' physical death on the cross overcome? What type of death will those who are unredeemed suffer that those who are redeemed no longer suffer?

Is physical death part of God's original design

When did physical death become part of our reality? (physical death for all)

Before the literal Fall of Mankind

After the literal Fall of Mankind

No literal Fall, physical death is a natural part of life that God intended it to be

Option four, explain.

Well-Known Member

Formerly known as Mercury

Formerly known as Mercury

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

avid reader

Contributor

Well-Known Member

sine ira et studio

avid reader

sine ira et studio

Active Member

avid reader

Formerly known as Mercury

June Carter, pray for us!

you are not reading this.

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency