Death before sin?
- Thread starter TheLearner
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I was just talking about this! My own answer is that the concept of death was known, if not experienced. God warned Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge under threat of death BEFORE the original sin. And they both knew that was something to avoid. However, the actuality of death did not happen until AFTER the actuality of sin. So the actual sin came before the actual death, but the knowledge of death came before the knowledge of sin.
It is according to if you hold to a young or old Earth view and what type of death. Old Earth holds that there was death before the fall as in outside of the garden animal death occurred. Then came mankind in the garden where peace was held for awhile. No death in the garden. Until the fall then spiritual death occurred for mankind and this also brought physical death for mankind. This is how in this view fossil fuels were prepared for mankind.
Young earth believes all of creation happened in 6 literal days so of course no death occurred for animal or human until the fall. In this view fossil fuels was prepared by the flood.
Young earth believes all of creation happened in 6 literal days so of course no death occurred for animal or human until the fall. In this view fossil fuels was prepared by the flood.
-
1
- Show all
If you are referring to the geological fossil record, there are a couple of points of view. One is that the fossils were produced by Noah's flood. This seems improbable as vast numbers of creatures should have made it to the ark that we do not see now.
Pre-Adamic creation suggests that there was a flood prior to Noah's, even more catastrophic. Nothing survived that. So the Genesis account is God restoring the earth to an inhabitable state and repopulating with flora, fauna and humanity. That's what I reckon. It has no bearing on salvation. It may help to answer the objections of unbelievers.
Pre-Adamic creation suggests that there was a flood prior to Noah's, even more catastrophic. Nothing survived that. So the Genesis account is God restoring the earth to an inhabitable state and repopulating with flora, fauna and humanity. That's what I reckon. It has no bearing on salvation. It may help to answer the objections of unbelievers.
-
1
- Show all
Hello Mr. 17Bees sir 
You know, for me the real kicker is the fact that sin is the result of the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14-15), and in light of that fact, one has to wonder why Adam and Eve did not simply eat of the Tree of Life instead? Some believe Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of Life, as if they could not have been alive otherwise, but this is obviously (for me, any ways) an incorrect view, for eating of it would have given them life ever after. God prevented them from eating of the Tree of Life after they sinned specifically so they could not live forever after. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
You know, for me the real kicker is the fact that sin is the result of the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14-15), and in light of that fact, one has to wonder why Adam and Eve did not simply eat of the Tree of Life instead? Some believe Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of Life, as if they could not have been alive otherwise, but this is obviously (for me, any ways) an incorrect view, for eating of it would have given them life ever after. God prevented them from eating of the Tree of Life after they sinned specifically so they could not live forever after. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.-
1
-
1
- Show all
In the old earth view, Satan is recognized as the first created being to have sinned. And angels were created way before mankind was. Since Ezek 28 shows Satan in the "Eden, the garden of God", it is believed that before Satan's rebellion, Satan was on earth.
When Gen 1:2 is properly exegeted, it says "but the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland". When the key words are compared with how those key words have been translated elsewhere in the Bible, this is what the verse says.
Since no one knows how long before mankind angels existed, and Satan was on earth in the garden before he rebelled, it seems reasonable that after Satan rebelled, he no longer resided in heaven, and took his followers elsewhere. Earth? Maybe. If so, the fact of v.2 is evidence that the earth became a wasteland by Satan. So God packed the earth in ice and Gen 1:2ff is the summary of a restoration, not original creation.
Therefore, the dinosaurs lived way before mankind and would have suffered death from Satan and followers.
This would indicate that animal death occurred before mankind was created. So when the Bible speaks of death from sin, it would be referring to death on planet earth after Adam sinned. Not death as a result of angelic sin.
In a Ken Hamm video series on creation (he is a YEC) the question of carbon 14 dating came up. The moderator noted that carbon 14 dating is only accurate out to 10-15,000 years. After that, it begins to lose accuracy.
Hm. If the earth is only 6-10,000 years old, wouldn't all the measurements of various parts and places on earth show numbers no more than 10,000 years old?
The age of the earth was calculated back in 1976 by geologic columns by a geologist named Charles Lyell. A Presbyterian minister named Thomas Chalmers in 1814, based on the work of Lyell came up with what he called the "gap theory".
Darwin was born in 1804, so the age of the earth by Lyell was not influenced by the nutty notion of evolution in any way.
Unfortunately many YEC cannot separate an old earth view from evolution. While evolution demands an old earth, an old earth does not need evolution.
God created the earth as good. After Satan rebelled and trashed the earth, it became uninhabitable.
So God restored the earth and created Adam/Eve and placed them on earth.
btw, Heb 11:3 is poorly translated. Instead of "framed/fit/prepared/created" the Greek word means "restored" as the word is translated that way in Gal 6:1 and 1 Pet 5:10, and translated as "mended" for what the disciples were doing to their fishing nets.
When Gen 1:2 is properly exegeted, it says "but the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland". When the key words are compared with how those key words have been translated elsewhere in the Bible, this is what the verse says.
Since no one knows how long before mankind angels existed, and Satan was on earth in the garden before he rebelled, it seems reasonable that after Satan rebelled, he no longer resided in heaven, and took his followers elsewhere. Earth? Maybe. If so, the fact of v.2 is evidence that the earth became a wasteland by Satan. So God packed the earth in ice and Gen 1:2ff is the summary of a restoration, not original creation.
Therefore, the dinosaurs lived way before mankind and would have suffered death from Satan and followers.
This would indicate that animal death occurred before mankind was created. So when the Bible speaks of death from sin, it would be referring to death on planet earth after Adam sinned. Not death as a result of angelic sin.
In a Ken Hamm video series on creation (he is a YEC) the question of carbon 14 dating came up. The moderator noted that carbon 14 dating is only accurate out to 10-15,000 years. After that, it begins to lose accuracy.
Hm. If the earth is only 6-10,000 years old, wouldn't all the measurements of various parts and places on earth show numbers no more than 10,000 years old?
The age of the earth was calculated back in 1976 by geologic columns by a geologist named Charles Lyell. A Presbyterian minister named Thomas Chalmers in 1814, based on the work of Lyell came up with what he called the "gap theory".
Darwin was born in 1804, so the age of the earth by Lyell was not influenced by the nutty notion of evolution in any way.
Unfortunately many YEC cannot separate an old earth view from evolution. While evolution demands an old earth, an old earth does not need evolution.
God created the earth as good. After Satan rebelled and trashed the earth, it became uninhabitable.
So God restored the earth and created Adam/Eve and placed them on earth.
btw, Heb 11:3 is poorly translated. Instead of "framed/fit/prepared/created" the Greek word means "restored" as the word is translated that way in Gal 6:1 and 1 Pet 5:10, and translated as "mended" for what the disciples were doing to their fishing nets.
-
1
- Show all
Hello Mr. 17Bees sir You know, for me the real kicker is the fact that sin is the result of the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14-15), and in light of that fact, one has to wonder why Adam and Eve did not simply eat of the Tree of Life instead? Some believe Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of Life, as if they could not have been alive otherwise, but this is obviously (for me, any ways) an incorrect view, for eating of it would have given them life ever after. God prevented them from eating of the Tree of Life after they sinned specifically so they could not live forever after. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
You know, for me the real kicker is the fact that sin is the result of the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14-15), and in light of that fact, one has to wonder why Adam and Eve did not simply eat of the Tree of Life instead? Some believe Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of Life, as if they could not have been alive otherwise, but this is obviously (for me, any ways) an incorrect view, for eating of it would have given them life ever after. God prevented them from eating of the Tree of Life after they sinned specifically so they could not live forever after. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
Could you clarify this? I'm not sure what you are referring to? Evangelicals believe just one account, from Genesis 1. But there are 2 views of Gen 1: whole chapter is original creation, approx 6K yrs ago, and whole chapter is a restoration except v.1, which is original creation.
Is this what you mean, or something else?
Is this what you mean, or something else?
Death came as a result of sin. How long they would have or could have lived had they not eaten of the forbidden tree is a "what if" I would rather not engage in. My view is that they were of the natural world, and required a Spiritual rebirth just as we all do... and that likely would have happened had they partaken of the Tree of Life instead, which some now acknowledge as a person Who is the True Vine, purposed from before the foundation of the world to give His life as a ransom for those who would believe by grace through faith in His shed righteous blood to pay the sin debt. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 1 Corinthians 15:46
.
According to Gen 5:3 and Heb 1:1-3, image and likeness basically refers to
progeny, i.e. offspring.
Genuine sons are born in that position. But Man wasn't born with God-- i.e.
via procreation --rather, Man was created, viz: Man exists as God's
handiwork, sort of like how Geppetto made for himself a little wooden son
named Pinocchio.
Now, Geppetto and Pinocchio both look human, though one is for real and
the other a doll. But Man's creator isn't human, nor does He look human:
God is spirit whereas Man is physical; and God is eternal whereas Man is
temporal. So we have to be careful to keep the progeny aspect within
reasonable limits.
It's likely best to assume that the creator endowed Man with His image and
likeness rather than Man inheriting the status as a son born in the home.
_
According to Gen 5:3 and Heb 1:1-3, image and likeness basically refers to
progeny, i.e. offspring.
Genuine sons are born in that position. But Man wasn't born with God-- i.e.
via procreation --rather, Man was created, viz: Man exists as God's
handiwork, sort of like how Geppetto made for himself a little wooden son
named Pinocchio.
Now, Geppetto and Pinocchio both look human, though one is for real and
the other a doll. But Man's creator isn't human, nor does He look human:
God is spirit whereas Man is physical; and God is eternal whereas Man is
temporal. So we have to be careful to keep the progeny aspect within
reasonable limits.
It's likely best to assume that the creator endowed Man with His image and
likeness rather than Man inheriting the status as a son born in the home.
_
.
• Gen 2:15-17 . .The Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden
of Eden, to till it and tend it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying:
Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat; but as for the tree of
knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for in the day you eat of
it, you shall die.
The first thing to point out is that in order for the warning to resonate in
Adam's thinking; it had to be related to death as he understood death in his
own day rather than death as modern Sunday school classes construe it in
their day. In other words: Adam's concept of death was primitive, i.e.
normal and natural rather than spiritual.
As far as can be known from scripture, Man is the only specie that God
created with immortality. The animal kingdom was given nothing like it. That
being the case, then I think it's safe to assume that death was common all
around Adam by means of vegetation, birds, bugs, and beasts so that it
wasn't a strange new word in his vocabulary; i.e. God didn't have to take a
moment and define death for Adam seeing as how it was doubtless a
common occurrence in his everyday life.
Adam saw things born, he saw things grow to maturity, he saw things
gradually wither, he saw their life ebb away, and he saw them decay and
dissolve into nothing. So I think we can be reasonably confident that Adam
was up to speed on at least the natural aspects of death; viz: he was
familiar with mortality and he was familiar with immortality.
Seeing as Adam was created with immortality, then had he not eaten of the
forbidden tree, he would've remained forever 21, but the very day that Adam
tasted its fruit, his body became infected with mortality, i.e. he lost
perpetual youth and began to age; a condition easily remedied by the tree of
life but alas, Adam was denied access to it.
Mortality is a walking death; it's slow, but very relentless. It's like Arnold
Swarzenegger's movie character The Terminator-- it feels neither pain nor
pity, nor remorse nor fear; it cannot be reasoned with nor can it be
bargained with, and it absolutely will not stop-- ever! --until you are dead;
really dead, like as in deceased.
_
• Gen 2:15-17 . .The Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden
of Eden, to till it and tend it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying:
Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat; but as for the tree of
knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for in the day you eat of
it, you shall die.
The first thing to point out is that in order for the warning to resonate in
Adam's thinking; it had to be related to death as he understood death in his
own day rather than death as modern Sunday school classes construe it in
their day. In other words: Adam's concept of death was primitive, i.e.
normal and natural rather than spiritual.
As far as can be known from scripture, Man is the only specie that God
created with immortality. The animal kingdom was given nothing like it. That
being the case, then I think it's safe to assume that death was common all
around Adam by means of vegetation, birds, bugs, and beasts so that it
wasn't a strange new word in his vocabulary; i.e. God didn't have to take a
moment and define death for Adam seeing as how it was doubtless a
common occurrence in his everyday life.
Adam saw things born, he saw things grow to maturity, he saw things
gradually wither, he saw their life ebb away, and he saw them decay and
dissolve into nothing. So I think we can be reasonably confident that Adam
was up to speed on at least the natural aspects of death; viz: he was
familiar with mortality and he was familiar with immortality.
Seeing as Adam was created with immortality, then had he not eaten of the
forbidden tree, he would've remained forever 21, but the very day that Adam
tasted its fruit, his body became infected with mortality, i.e. he lost
perpetual youth and began to age; a condition easily remedied by the tree of
life but alas, Adam was denied access to it.
Mortality is a walking death; it's slow, but very relentless. It's like Arnold
Swarzenegger's movie character The Terminator-- it feels neither pain nor
pity, nor remorse nor fear; it cannot be reasoned with nor can it be
bargained with, and it absolutely will not stop-- ever! --until you are dead;
really dead, like as in deceased.
_
-
1
- Show all