No death before sin

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

Honestly, prior to having any experience with Young Earth Creationism, I never thought anything of that verse in Romans. I just read over it, understood it to mean human death, and moved on. It doesn't even read very naturally as referring to animal death. It's kind of a painfully stressed interpretation of the passage. Other parts of the Bible are a little more difficult, but not much. That's mostly because with the verse from Romans, you have to want to read that as referring to animal death, and I mean really want to.

 

[AV1611VET]

Honestly, prior to having any experience with Young Earth Creationism, I never thought anything of that verse in Romans. I just read over it, understood it to mean human death, and moved on. It doesn't even read very naturally as referring to animal death. It's kind of a painfully stressed interpretation of the passage. Other parts of the Bible are a little more difficult, but not much. That's mostly because with the verse from Romans, you have to want to read that as referring to animal death, and I mean really want to.

You were never told that God killed the first animal to clothe Adam & Eve? and that that foreshadowed the death of Christ to atone for our sin nature?

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

You were never told that God killed the first animal to clothe Adam & Eve?

No, actually. I never heard either of those ideas until I was already in college, since I really never went to church when I was younger. The idea that the animal skins were a foreshadowing of the sacrifice of Christ, I actually heard in a college class. The idea that they were the first animals killed, I picked up off of Answers in Genesis. The first doesn't have a tremendous amount to do with whether animal death occurred prior to the Fall. The latter really starts from an assumption that no animal had died beforehand, and runs with it. I think the fact that the Bible doesn't seem to make much of the fact that an animal was killed to make them should be a good argument against the idea that they represented the first animal deaths, though. Wouldn't you make a note of the first death in history, since it would be such a catastrophic new reality?

 

[AV1611VET]

Wouldn't you make a note of the first death in history, since it would be such a catastrophic new reality?

Yes, but you just called it an "assumption."

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

Yes, but you just called it an "assumption."

Well, that's pretty much what it is in this context. According to Merriam-Webster, an assumption is synonymous with a presupposition. Since the text doesn't state that they are the first animals to be killed, any drawing of that conclusion from the verse in Genesis does require the assumption (or presupposition) of the idea that no animal death occurred prior to the Fall. Looking at the text with that assumption suggests that they may have been the first animals to die, but you can't draw the conclusion that there was no animal death prior to the Fall from the text, since it doesn't actually say that they were the first animal deaths, and so it must be a presupposition brought to the table by the reader.

I'm suggesting that the text would likely note if they were the first animal deaths. Regardless of the truth of the assumption (ie., the claim that there was no animal death prior to the Fall), the deaths of the animals used to make the skins are unlikely to reflect the first animal deaths.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, that's pretty much what it is in this context. According to Merriam-Webster, an assumption is synonymous with a presupposition. Since the text doesn't state that they are the first animals to be killed, any drawing of that conclusion from the verse in Genesis does require the assumption (or presupposition) of the idea that no animal death occurred prior to the Fall. Looking at the text with that assumption suggests that they may have been the first animals to die, but you can't draw the conclusion that there was no animal death prior to the Fall from the text, since it doesn't actually say that they were the first animal deaths, and so it must be a presupposition brought to the table by the reader.

I'm suggesting that the text would likely note if they were the first animal deaths. Regardless of the truth of the assumption (ie., the claim that there was no animal death prior to the Fall), the deaths of the animals used to make the skins are unlikely to reflect the first animal deaths.

Suit yourself -- just please don't expect it to suit me.

 

[grace24]

If you read the entire chapter you will see that the author is quite obviously talking about spiritual death. You are referring to this verse:

Romans 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

As he continues, he says this:

Romans 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

And this:

Romans 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

And this:

Romans 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

What you show is a perfect example of quote mining the Bible.

How do you know it was spiritual, that passage you qoute did not specify it.

 

[HitchSlap]

Because up to that point, they hadn't figured out that everyone has a physical death?

 

[hisgrace26]

I explain it as a physical necessity.
Huh? I'm not sure what you mean by "it" in this case. Physical death? Spiritual death? I'm not sure how anything I said invokes millions of years. Not that I object to the reading of earth and life existing for millions of years, I just don't see how that issue relates to this topic in any way. I set aside the issue specifically by only letting our bacteria run for a literal 7 days.
Spiritual death was. Physical death must have existed even with a literal 7 day creation and an IMMEDIATE fall.

Man your view is so bent and twisted. But if that makes you happy then go ahead and believe it.

 

[[serious]]

Man your view is so bent and twisted. But if that makes you happy then go ahead and believe it.

Do you not believe in exponents?

"You say 4^3 is 64, but that's just your twisted worldview."

 

[twinc]

Death and God are incompatible - the Bible clearly tells us this but it has to be a Catholic bible - Wisdom 1:13-14 and 2:23-24 - twinc

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Whichever way you look at the story, the character of God couldn't look any worse.

Poor old Adam and Eve. They're just like laboratory mice being punished for pressing the button that smells of cheese.

And given what we know of the God of the old testament, if there was no death before the fall (nice touch that, in the beginning everything was sweet and lovely and everyone lived forever- good set up), He must have been beside Himself with impatience. No wonder He made 'the fall' inevitable. He was probably cheering Eve on. If you don't think so, then imagine what sort of book the bible would be without it.

 

[twinc]

Whichever way you look at the story, the character of God couldn't look any worse.

Poor old Adam and Eve. They're just like laboratory mice being punished for pressing the button that smells of cheese.

And given what we know of the God of the old testament, if there was no death before the fall (nice touch that, in the beginning everything was sweet and lovely and everyone lived forever- good set up), He must have been beside Himself with impatience. No wonder He made 'the fall' inevitable. He was probably cheering Eve on. If you don't think so, then imagine what sort of book the bible would be without it.

no more - that is the problem too much faulty imagination and too little reality - twinc

 

[AV1611VET]

Whichever way you look at the story, the character of God couldn't look any worse.

And you could have done better?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

And you could have done better?

Could anyone have done any worse?