• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The role of the Tree of Life

Status
Not open for further replies.

hannodb

Newbie
Apr 10, 2006
14
1
Pretoria
✟22,936.00
Faith
Calvinist

As I said, God does not really provide the details, but I trust His judgement on this matter. Though, it does makes sence that if we, who are the crown on creation falls, the rest of creation will fall with us. As for what the animals did to deserve it, I can only offer the rational of the election in Romans 8-9.

The Lady Kate said:
Of course. Lucifer was the first to sin. Is our fate linked to his?.
No, but the creation was placed under our care. We were not placed under Lucifer's care. In fact, Lucifer fell before we were even created.



No, that doesn't make sense. Why would there then be a ressurection - which is unnatural - if our souls could just wait to be born again on the new Earth? Remember, our minds are limited to what we know. God can do what we can't even concieve.

The Lady Kate said:
Certainly a possibility, but we're forgetting that God's creation expands far beyond this one globe... no need for him to sterilize us just because we fill up the first of a possibly infinite supply of worlds.

I can't deny the possibility.

As a child I always thought that the new earth will be eternaly flat. In other words, you could make off in one dirrection, and keep on discovering for ever.
Now that I'm all grown up, my imagination has been limited by science. >Ugh<
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
The Bible is very clear that Death (physical), pain and hardhip was not part of God's original plan, nor will it be part of the New Earth.

I don't find that the Bible is very clear on that at all. What in the Bible convinces you that it is very clear?
 
Upvote 0

hannodb

Newbie
Apr 10, 2006
14
1
Pretoria
✟22,936.00
Faith
Calvinist
shernren said:
I don't find that the Bible is very clear on that at all. What in the Bible convinces you that it is very clear?
Gen 2 : 16 - 17
Rom 8 : 19 - 23
1 Kor 15 : 21 - 22
1 Kor 15 : 52 - 56 (ASPECIALLY 56)
Rom 5 : 12 - 21
Rev 21 : 4 - 5

To name just a few. A complete list will go on and on. The link between sin and death is clear from Genesis to Revelation. And on occations, it is also made clear that not only mankind, but all of nature is suffering decay due to sin. God did not intent for His creation to suffer. All forms of suffering is the result of the presence of sin.
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
Gen 2 : 16 - 17
Rom 8 : 19 - 23
1 Kor 15 : 21 - 22
1 Kor 15 : 52 - 56 (ASPECIALLY 56)
Rom 5 : 12 - 21
Rev 21 : 4 - 5

None of these show that before the Fall animals would not have died, and therefore they are not sufficient objections against theistic evolution.
 
Upvote 0

random_guy

Senior Veteran
Jan 30, 2005
2,528
148
✟3,457.00
Faith
Christian

I know you didn't want to open a can of worms, but I just wanted to correct some misconceptions. BB is a theory about the expansion of time and space. It says nothing about before the BB and nothing about how that stuff got there. It doesn't matter if God created the energy or if aliens created the initial energy, BB is still valid. We can see evidence of this from the redshift of the light and the cosmic microwave background. That's why it's a valid theory because it predicted that we would find CMB, and eventually, we did find it. Aguing that BB doesn't explain where it the initial energy came from means the BB is invalid as arguing that Germ Theory doesn't explain the origin of germs so it is flawed., or that evolution doesn't explain the origins of life. That's to answer the first part of why the BB is scientific.

Now to ID. The problem with ID is it's unfalisifiable. If you assume ID, can you show an object that isn't designed? How and what did the Designer use? What was the motive of the designer? None of these questions are falsifiable. One possible answer is the designer could've used evolution to build some parts, designed others. How do you falsify this statement? I hope this makes sense. If not, feel free to create a new thread about ID as science and I'll try to more give better responses.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.