Prefall Death

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

These scriptures all pertain to people.

Only because human death was what was relevant to the point Paul was making. Nothing in that passage suggests that the decaying state of the world is not connected to Adam's fall.

And specifically we can see that the decaying state of the world is a result of the fall, "To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life" (Genesis 3:17), and that animals didn't eat each other "Then God said,

[Guest shiloh357]

I was doing an experiment this week in which I was looking at cell death and was reminded of some of the creationist positions regarding the genome and death after the fall. The "degradation of the genome" argument does not make sense to me because it is not supported by scripture. In fact, it is pretty clear that scripture incorporates death prior to sin does it not? While some could die from non natural causes (ie, accidents), old age must have occurred, which would mean that, for lack of a better word, human genomes were not "perfect" as some would die of old age--they'd just wear out, just as happens to some (the lucky ones!) today.

The degradation of the genome is not directly spelled out in scripture, but turn to God's comments in Genesis where he says that his spirit shall not always strive with man, because that he also is flesh. After the flood, UV rays from the sun were allowed to enter the earth, being previously prevented by the giant water bubble that surrounded the earth before the flood, which was a source of much of the water God used in the flood. It has been a speculation of mine that UV rays damages the body's ability to absorb oxygen as efficiently as possible thus allowing for rapid cellular degradation. Thoughts please.

Um...Giant water bubble that was around the Earth? How do you come to that conclusion?

Itis a common creationist view that based on the wording of Genesis 1 when God separated the waters which are above from the waters below that he created a large water canopy around the the earth that protected man from most of UV rays of the sun. It is the UV rays that give the sky its bluish hue. However, before the flood when man was living hundreds and hundreds of years, the sky would have had a more pinkish hue.

It is theorized that the flood was in part caused by the water canopy collapsing on the earth and that it explains why man's life exectancy got shorter and shorter the farther we get from the flood. The flood was the product of water coming up from below and down from above in what amounts to torrents that would make a tsunami look like a Sunday picnic in the park.

[Guest shiloh357]

Itis a common creationist view that based on the wording of Genesis 1 when God separated the waters which are above from the waters below that he created a large water canopy around the the earth that protected man from most of UV rays of the sun. It is the UV rays that give the sky its bluish hue. However, before the flood when man was living hundreds and hundreds of years, the sky would have had a more pinkish hue.

It is theorized that the flood was in part caused by the water canopy collapsing on the earth and that it explains why man's life exectancy got shorter and shorter the farther we get from the flood. The flood was the product of water coming up from below and down from above in what amounts to torrents that would make a tsunami look like a Sunday picnic in the park.

I would say that this would be a rather confusing take. How deep was this water, also how would plant life be able to properly grow if water stopped most of the uv rays. I don't know I just don't see that. It could be possible, but I think there are some holes in that theory.

How it is confusing? What holes?

[Guest]

.... Isn't the decision to disobey an act of sin? It cannot be; how could otherwise Adam be able to perform this act if he was not sinful before?

"I Will"

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Romans 3:23

The Spiral Into Hell

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. James 1:13-15

"But God"

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John 14:6

The Way Of Life

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: John 11:25

[Da Servant]

I was doing an experiment this week in which I was looking at cell death and was reminded of some of the creationist positions regarding the genome and death after the fall. The "degradation of the genome" argument does not make sense to me because it is not supported by scripture. In fact, it is pretty clear that scripture incorporates death prior to sin does it not? While some could die from non natural causes (ie, accidents), old age must have occurred, which would mean that, for lack of a better word, human genomes were not "perfect" as some would die of old age--they'd just wear out, just as happens to some (the lucky ones!) today.

The degradation of the genome is not directly spelled out in scripture, but turn to God's comments in Genesis where he says that his spirit shall not always strive with man, because that he also is flesh. After the flood, UV rays from the sun were allowed to enter the earth, being previously prevented by the giant water bubble that surrounded the earth before the flood, which was a source of much of the water God used in the flood. It has been a speculation of mine that UV rays damages the body's ability to absorb oxygen as efficiently as possible thus allowing for rapid cellular degradation. Thoughts please.

Um...Giant water bubble that was around the Earth? How do you come to that conclusion?

Genesis 1. When God created the earth he put a "firmament" in the midst of the waters to divide the waters from the waters. This is confirmed in the account of the flood when "God opened the windows of heaven" and the floods came. Science has confirmed that all one would need to keep such massive amounts of water suspended above the earth is a really fast moving current of air, a.k.a. the jet stream.

[Guest]

Eating of the Tree of Life was the only alternative presented to keep one from dying.

I can not find in scripture where anything dies before the fall. Can you show me where it is?

This is illogical in that it is based on the false premise that the ONLY reason there is no record of something dying is that death did not exist. Asking me to accept this begs the question. In fact, there might be many reasons why such an event was not recorded. You cannot base any case on a lack of evidence. I would be equally illogical for to ask you to show an scriptural example of animals receiving what we would consider a mortal wound and yet they did not die. An example might be an animal who fell from a great height, or one who was struck by a massive falling tree or beaten by meteors. No such example exists but since you believe what you do you must assume that it did, or that it might have or would in time. This is all silly of course.

Illogical?

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: Romans 5:12

Do Know

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. Isaiah 65:25

God

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. Revelation 21:4

Is Able ~

And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. Mark 10:27

It's Elementary My Dear Watson

[OneLight]

[i do not believe that insects were part of the original creation, just as I do not believe that cancer-eating bacteria was part of the original creation either. Just as thorns and thistles, diease, decay and everything assoicated with those things did not occur prior to the fall, I don't think insects and diease-causing parasites were there either. In fact, Noah is not expected to take any insects on to the ark. Now keep in mind, that is my opinion. I am not stating that as dogmatic, absolute fact.

What I still do not see is how they got there. Take insects, for instance. Some of them are really bad and do terrible things to other organisms. If they were not in the garden, I can only think of the following scenarios:

1 - they have been created by God at a later point

2 - they have been created by another entity at a later point

3 - abiogenesis in their final form

4 - evolution from preexisting creatures created by God

5 - evolution from preexisting creatures created by another entity

6 - evolution from life forms born via abiogenesis

7 - ?

We have to accept that scripture does not give an account of when incests were created. But, as for your numbering system, abiogenesis has been proven false, only God can create, evolution (in the sense you are using it) is not biblical, so only number 1, which is the first you though of, has to be the answer, or close to it.

[OneLight]

[i do not believe that insects were part of the original creation, just as I do not believe that cancer-eating bacteria was part of the original creation either. Just as thorns and thistles, diease, decay and everything assoicated with those things did not occur prior to the fall, I don't think insects and diease-causing parasites were there either. In fact, Noah is not expected to take any insects on to the ark. Now keep in mind, that is my opinion. I am not stating that as dogmatic, absolute fact.

What I still do not see is how they got there. Take insects, for instance. Some of them are really bad and do terrible things to other organisms. If they were not in the garden, I can only think of the following scenarios:

1 - they have been created by God at a later point

2 - they have been created by another entity at a later point

3 - abiogenesis in their final form

4 - evolution from preexisting creatures created by God

5 - evolution from preexisting creatures created by another entity

6 - evolution from life forms born via abiogenesis

7 - ?

We have to accept that scripture does not give an account of when incests were created. But, as for your numbering system, abiogenesis has been proven false, only God can create, evolution (in the sense you are using it) is not biblical, so only number 1, which is the first you though of, has to be the answer, or close to it.

So what are the creeping things?

Spiders?

I often wonder why people are told to live by faith but require answers for every question they have (not talking about you ruck).

[OneLight]

[i do not believe that insects were part of the original creation, just as I do not believe that cancer-eating bacteria was part of the original creation either. Just as thorns and thistles, diease, decay and everything assoicated with those things did not occur prior to the fall, I don't think insects and diease-causing parasites were there either. In fact, Noah is not expected to take any insects on to the ark. Now keep in mind, that is my opinion. I am not stating that as dogmatic, absolute fact.

What I still do not see is how they got there. Take insects, for instance. Some of them are really bad and do terrible things to other organisms. If they were not in the garden, I can only think of the following scenarios:

1 - they have been created by God at a later point

2 - they have been created by another entity at a later point

3 - abiogenesis in their final form

4 - evolution from preexisting creatures created by God

5 - evolution from preexisting creatures created by another entity

6 - evolution from life forms born via abiogenesis

7 - ?

We have to accept that scripture does not give an account of when incests were created. But, as for your numbering system, abiogenesis has been proven false, only God can create, evolution (in the sense you are using it) is not biblical, so only number 1, which is the first you though of, has to be the answer, or close to it.

This is a perfectly valid explanation. But according to some previous posts all these things are the consequence of man's sin and cannot be attributed to God. Therefore, I think my question is still open.

I don't believe that anyone who spoke of this happening after the fall believes that there is any other entity beside of God that can create life. If I am wrong, those who do believe there is another entity beside God that can create life, please speak up.

[OneLight]

Floating water? What do you mean?

Well, Da Servant presented something I had never heard before, which was a water bubble surrounding the Earth. I just said floating water, but thats what it would almost be like. I was just trying to understand this theory.

Well, a physical bubble of liquid water does not make sense. It needs to rotate in order to stay in orbit, and you will have problems to make a shell rotate so that all points in the bubble have the required centrifugal force necessary to stay in orbit. This would make sense only if the bubble was stationary, and this is only possible if it was made of ice, but this creates even bigger problems concerning the filtering of light through ice and the fact that the sun would swipe away the ice turning the earth into a giant comet. In any case, opening the gates of heaven is not enough, you have to melt the water first. But again, why are you looking for scientifically explanations for something which is clearly supernatural?

Besides what you presented, there is also gravity.