Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Death in Relation to the Creation and Fall
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1 of 208 (721533)
03-08-2014 9:57 PM


This is an answer to Devil's Advocate's Message 396 from the Arizona thread where we had gone off topic. Since it looks like it may continue for a while it seemed best to move it to a new thread.
Faith writes:
Only because of the Fall, but it [death] was not a part of the original Creation.
DA writes:
You even admitted that plants dies before Adam's fall. So death did exist for some of creation before the Fall.
As I also said, plants are not regarded as living OR dying in scripture as animals and humanity are, so you are imposing a contemporary definition on scripture. Plants are food in scripture, period.
[In relation to a particular scripture verse I'll have to retrieve] You are adding the "spiritual" to limit it to "spiritual death" but the normal reading is physical death. It includes spiritual death just as eternal life also includes the resurrected body.
I am not limiting it to spiritual death per se, so much as making emphasis that spiritual death is much more eternally consequential than physical death. And I think that is the intent of this scripture as well.
You specifically and rather emphatically interpreted that scripture as "spiritual death" which is consistent with your claim that Adam only died a spiritual death as a result of the Fall, while his physical death was normal and inevitable and unrelated to the Fall, as if God had created us all with physical death as part of our life. Although you are not keeping this as clear as it should be, sometimes leaving it vague enough for me to keep stumbling over your terminology, this as I understand it is the crux of our disagreement.
This is not the same thing as saying that "spiritual death is much more eternally consequential than physical death" with which I could agree, but I don't agree that physical death was in any way a natural part of God's creation, but that it entered as a result of the Fall, as did spiritual death, in fact the death of the whole being, and of the whole Creation. Your exception of plants is not scriptural.
Look at this section of the Bible in context. Paul says in Romans 6:19-23
Romans 6:19 writes:
I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death!
What kind of death is he talking about? A spiritual death, a spiritual separation from God. Everyone dies a physical death, so it is evident he is not talking about a physical death here. Paul is saying that we need to die to our sins, so that we may live eternally with God without being spiritually separated from Him.
For starters everyone is BORN into spiritual death because of the Fall, and only if redeemed by Christ do we begin to regain the spiritual life which Adam lost, which also eventuated in his physical death, which he also bequeathed to us as a result of his sin. You are making the usual unnecessary and misleading distinction. Sin is spiritual death but it's artificial to limit its effects to the spirit. Disease of the body is a process of death, there is no other way to describe it in the context of scripture and the Fall. One reason diseases such as leprosy set people apart from the people of God as "unclean" and that physical deformity even in an animal made that animal unusable for sacrifice, is that disease represents the bodily consequences of sin. We are not spiritually astute enough to see the cause and effect in most cases but there is no way that disease or physical death is a natural process that was built into the Creation. Physical infirmities and death are all the consequence of the Fall. Yes it starts with spiritual death, but physical death is a major consequence of sin. And we fallen human beings hardly even feel our spiritual condition anyway, but we DO feel disease and death and that's why scripture speaks of always living under the fear of death, and it certainly doesn't mean fear of *spiritual* death because due to the Fall we don't have the faculties to fear that. But it is our lot as fallen sinful creatures to fear physical death. Only Christ can free us from that fear. O death where is your sting? We don't experience the sting of spiritual death.
But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life.
Eternal life after our physical bodies have died a physical death.
Yes, our bodies having become thoroughly corrupted by sin.
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
The wages of sin is eternal separation from God aka spiritual death. The gift of God for those in Christ is eternal life of our souls/heavenly body.
The wages of sin can include disease which is part of physical death. Physical death is ALWAYS implied even where spiritual death is the main subject and the most important.
Even Charles Spurgeon who you recognize as a respected theologian discusses spiritual death in his Novermber 1, 1885 sermon in relation to the Romans 6:23 passage.
Charles Spurgeon in "Death and Life The Wage and the Gift" http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols31-33/chs1868.pdf writes:
To set forth this terrible fact, I shall make a few observations. First, death is the natural result of all sin. When man acts according to God’s order, he lives, but when he breaks his Maker’s laws, he wrecks himself and does that which causes death. The Lord warned Adam thusIn the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die. Dying does not mean ceasing to exist, for Adam did not cease to exist, nor do those who die. The term, death, conveys to me no such idea as that of ceasing to exist, or how could I understand that word in 1 John 3:14He that loves not his brother abides in death? How could a man abide in annihilation? A grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, but it does not cease to be! No, rather, it brings forth much fruit.
That Adam did die in the day when he ate of that fruit is certain, or else the Lord spoke not the truth. His nature was wrecked and ruined by separation from God and by a fall from that condition which constitutes the true life of man.
When any man commits sin, he dies to holiness and purity. No transgression is venial, but every sin is mortal and genders death...
All desire after God and all delight in Him die out where sin reigns. Death is the separation of the soul from God.
Alas, this death has passed upon all men!
...
Since sin as naturally brings spiritual death upon men as fire brings burning, death is spoken of as the wages of sin
But the problem in all this is that it is basically a straw man argument -- IF you are claiming that I've said ONLY physical death is the result of the Fall. I have not denied spiritual death at all ever anywhere in this discussion, but you have denied that physical death is the result of sin and the Fall. THAT is what this discussion is about. There is no need to convince me of the importance of spiritual death, but physical death is always the end result of this physical life for all humanity due to sin, and that is implied in all the discussions of death even where spiritual death is the focus.
Here is a good link that explains the context of Romans 6:23 in relation to spiritual and physical death: http://carm.org/romans6-23-spiritual-physical-death
The point of most interest in relation to this discussion appears to be this:
However, we also know that sin has brought physical death into the world. When Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, they eventually died physically. Sin, which is breaking the law of God (1 John 3:4), brings both physical (Rom. 5:12) and spiritual death (Isaiah 59:2). So, Romans 6:23 can legitimately be interpreted to include both spiritual and physical death when it speaks of "the wages of sin."
If sin brings both physical and spiritual death, then the Fall brought both physical and spiritual death, as I've been saying. Since you posted this link maybe you are no longer claiming that the Fall did NOT bring physical death? Or what?
In context it is WE who are putting to death our deeds through the Spirit, not Christ.
I concur and believe we are saying the same thing here.
But you equated putting to death the deeds of the body with Christ's salvation, so I am answering you here. The reference is not to His salvation but to our obligation through the Spirit.
We will be CHANGED, scripture says, not that we will "lose" our bodies but that they will be glorified and perfected.
Ok, "lose" is probably not the most ideal word to use here. Transformed or changed is a better word.
OK.
The only point is that they WILL be bodies, we will not be disembodied spirits, like angels or demons and ghosts. Jesus made a point of emphasizing that.
I concur they will bodies but not flawed physical, mortal bodies.Also, angels and demons had bodies as well, though not physical, mortal ones.
We probably don't need to discuss this and I don't know how much information we could glean from scripture about it anyway, but I think our condition as human beings, including our physical bodies in their transformed condition, is unique in God's Creation.
So we agree on that much. What we disagree about is that Christ's death redeemed our physical bodies from death which came upon us because of sin at the Fall,
He redeemed our immortal souls not our physical mortal bodies per se.
Well I never meant to say "per se," only that He DID redeem our physical bodies. Why else did He need to become "incarnate" which means embodied, in human form? So He could redeem our entire being both spiritual and physical which was ALL corrupted at the Fall, and die the death both physical [rather brutally in His case] and spiritual ["My God My God why have You forsaken Me?] The whole point of His physical death was to redeem our sin-corrupted BODIES, which isn't to say that was ALL He died to redeem of our human nature.
I don't see where you conclude that Jesus redeemed our physical mortal bodies.
See above.
Our physical bodies will decay into the ground will it not? Unless your body is mummified or somehow preserved, a human body even in a casket will decompose to bones within a matter of years and bones will decompose to dust in several hundred years in a casket. So it will be a miraculous occurrence by God to raise our physical bodies from the dead , since many of these physical bodies no longer exist in physical bodily form. I am not saying God is not going to transform our bodies, I believe he will, but I don't see this as entirely the redemption being talked about. The emphasis of salvation is on the state of our immortal soul in our glorified bodies in heaven.
When you use terms like "entirely the redemption being talked about" you distort the point I'm trying to make. I'm not limiting the Fall to our physical death nor the redemption to the salvation of the body, nowhere near such an idea; He died to redeem our whole fallen human nature. However, about the physical body, there would have been no need to redeem our bodies if they had not died as a result of sin. This story is all about SIN AND REDEMPTION, which includes body, soul and spirit all in one. He is resurrecting our soul and spirit as soon as we believe and trust in Him, our bodies will be resurrected at the very end, even rise from the grave which scripture describes of the first of those to be raptured.
Further, those who are in Christ who have died a physical death are in heaven as we speak, are they not.
Yes, and as disembodied spirits in this interim phase before the complete resurrection I believe.
Luke 23:43 writes:
Jesus answered him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise."
Just some things to think about and contemplate.
Again, you seem to be imputing to me a straw man notion that says ONLY physical death was the result of the Fall and ONLY physical life the result of Christ's salvation. Not true.
But it does seem that YOUR argument is that ONLY spiritual death was the result of the Fall and ONLY spiritual life the result of Christ's salvation, with the resurrection of the body just a sort of meaningless bonus gift from God or something like that.
BTW, I know this is off-subject. I am willing to move this to another thread if desired.
Done.
Edited by Faith, : to add links and comment to link.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by NoNukes, posted 03-09-2014 12:29 PM Faith has replied
 Message 4 by arachnophilia, posted 03-09-2014 12:33 PM Faith has replied
 Message 15 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-09-2014 5:51 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 53 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-11-2014 5:02 PM Faith has replied

  
AdminPhat
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 208 (721535)
03-09-2014 3:01 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Death in Relation to the Creation and Fall thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 3 of 208 (721550)
03-09-2014 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
03-08-2014 9:57 PM


As I also said, plants are not regarded as living OR dying in scripture as animals and humanity are, so you are imposing a contemporary definition on scripture. Plants are food in scripture, period.
This statement is false. It is easy to find:
1. Scriptural references to plants dying. (And I don't mean just withering and turning brown). Example. Ezekiel 31:2-18 "No other trees so well-watered are ever to reach such a height; they are all destined for death"
2. Scriptural references to plants that are not food including references to plants which are poisonous.
3. Scripture comparing plant deaths to the deaths of humans.
4. The scripture talks about death coming to man after the fall and not about death coming to earth for the first time.
I'd be happy to point out examples for you.
But in some regards the argument about using a 'modern interpretation' is silly.
No matter what the Bible authors actually thought, plants do indeed die. If those writers thought otherwise, and they clearly did NOT, they were wrong. You cannot eat a carrot, potato, or a cabbage without killing a plant. Rabbits are surely dealers of death.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 03-08-2014 9:57 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:04 PM NoNukes has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 4 of 208 (721551)
03-09-2014 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
03-08-2014 9:57 PM


Faith writes:
but I don't agree that physical death was in any way a natural part of God's creation, but that it entered as a result of the Fall, as did spiritual death, in fact the death of the whole being, and of the whole Creation.
what was the purpose of the tree of life?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 03-08-2014 9:57 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:13 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 5 of 208 (721552)
03-09-2014 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by NoNukes
03-09-2014 12:29 PM


Plants are not depicted as living and dying in the same sense as animals and people. If you want one indication of that, Noah was not commanded to preserve them on the ark.
So scripture says they had uses other than food, I stand corrected, but the point is trivial.
4. The scripture talks about death coming to man after the fall and not about death coming to earth for the first time.
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:
Both sin and death "entered into the world" by Adam. Sounds like death coming to earth for the first time to me. And that's how it is always treated by orthodox theologians.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by NoNukes, posted 03-09-2014 12:29 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by NoNukes, posted 03-09-2014 1:52 PM Faith has replied
 Message 11 by ringo, posted 03-09-2014 2:54 PM Faith has replied
 Message 14 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-09-2014 4:51 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 6 of 208 (721553)
03-09-2014 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by arachnophilia
03-09-2014 12:33 PM


what was the purpose of the tree of life?
Most commentators I've read agree that it was for a reminder and sustainer of immortality, as long as they remained in a state of innocence. After the Fall it became a dangerous temptation as a route to an eternal state of evil comparable to Satan's condition; but Christ is now the Tree of Life to all who belong to Him.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by arachnophilia, posted 03-09-2014 12:33 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by arachnophilia, posted 03-09-2014 1:33 PM Faith has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 7 of 208 (721554)
03-09-2014 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Faith
03-09-2014 1:13 PM


right, but, in the story. why was it in the garden?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:13 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:44 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 8 of 208 (721555)
03-09-2014 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by arachnophilia
03-09-2014 1:33 PM


It doesn't say. Genesis 2:9 merely says it was in the midst of the garden, no reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by arachnophilia, posted 03-09-2014 1:33 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by arachnophilia, posted 03-09-2014 3:15 PM Faith has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 208 (721556)
03-09-2014 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Faith
03-09-2014 1:04 PM


Plants are not depicted as living and dying in the same sense as animals and people. If you want one indication of that, Noah was not commanded to preserve them on the ark.
That only suggests a different value system for plants and animals and not necessarily that plants do not die. Besides that, surely there were plants at least for food on the ark? The idea that there were no plants on the ark is flat out ridiculous. I gave you an example of trees described as dying, but you ignored it.
Both sin and death "entered into the world" by Adam. Sounds like death coming to earth for the first time to me. And that's how it is always treated by orthodox theologians.
Romans says 'death passed to all men'. There is no indication that plants and animals did not die or that death passed to them. There is no indication that animals were punished for Adams sin, and certainly no indication that plants began to die.
But crucial to your position, we know that plants do die.
If there is no description or a denial of plants dying even after the fall, then the scriptures would simply be wrong on that point because we all know that plants do die. Is that really your position? Sure seems like it.
And that's how it is always treated by orthodox theologians.
Apparently those theologians think something other than the literal words in the Bible are important. The Bible says that plants die. Yes the Bible does value plant life and death differently than human life, but so do most people. But a denial that plants die would simply be bogus. The Bible does not do that.
ABE:
Question: Why did God think Abel's offering of dead animals was good?
Edited by NoNukes, : ABE

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 2:47 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 10 of 208 (721562)
03-09-2014 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by NoNukes
03-09-2014 1:52 PM


Oh for crying out loud, you are making the usual EVC mountain out of a molehill. Plants are NOT treated as living or dying IN THE SAME SENSE as human beings and animals. I DID NOT SAY PLANTS DON'T DIE," I said they are treated differently than animals and human beings. And yes they were on the ark as FOOD. Another nitpicking timewasting irivial piece of information. Plants do not breathe air as animals and humans do and they do not have blood in their veins as animals and humans do. Scripture says "the life is in the blood." It doesn't matter what YOU think, that's what scripture says.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by NoNukes, posted 03-09-2014 1:52 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 03-09-2014 4:33 PM Faith has replied
 Message 17 by NoNukes, posted 03-09-2014 8:23 PM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 11 of 208 (721563)
03-09-2014 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Faith
03-09-2014 1:04 PM


Faith writes:
Both sin and death "entered into the world" by Adam. Sounds like death coming to earth for the first time to me.
Well of course nobody died before Adam because there was nobody before Adam. That says nothing about "why" death entered.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 03-10-2014 12:22 AM ringo has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 12 of 208 (721566)
03-09-2014 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Faith
03-09-2014 1:44 PM


Faith writes:
It doesn't say. Genesis 2:9 merely says it was in the midst of the garden, no reason given.
right, but i'm asking for a little bit of thought applied to the text, not just what it says.
yahweh planted the garden for the man. why did he give the man a tree that provided life?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:44 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 03-10-2014 12:24 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 13 of 208 (721571)
03-09-2014 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Faith
03-09-2014 2:47 PM


Oh for crying out loud, you are making the usual EVC mountain out of a molehill. Plants are NOT treated as living or dying IN THE SAME SENSE as human beings and animals.
Plants live and die just as all organic life.
What is the difference between plants and animals as far as life is concerned? On the molecular level they are the same? How about bacteria, where do they fit in? How about fungi? Life is life, it makes no difference.
Another nitpicking timewasting irivial piece of information.
But this is the premise of your belief that physical death of life did not occur until the fall of Adam, is it not? You are the one that is espousing this belief. We are calling you on the carpet for it because it does not jive with your idea that all of life with exception of plants had eternal life before the fall of Adam. I don't see any Scripture that backs up this claim.
Plants do not breathe air as animals and humans do and they do not have blood in their veins as animals and humans do.
If you mean plants don't have lungs to breath air. No, neither do fish, some amphibians, insects, earthworms, etc. They do breath air in the fact that they absorb oxygen from the air. So how about fish, some amphibians, insects, earthworms, etc? Do they live according to the Bible or not? Not all animals have blood circulatory systems i.e. sponges, jellyfish, worms, etc. What does the Bible say about them?
This isn't nitpicking this is getting you to realize that your beliefs do not line up with science or the Bible.
It doesn't matter what YOU think, that's what scripture says.
You are deriving a belief that is based on an interpretation of multitude of scripture passages taken out of context and which do not add up to what you want them to say.
The scripture you are reciting, Leviticus 17 is discussing the OT Jewish law of not eating blood from animals:
Leviticus 17:10-13 writes:
I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people. For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life. Therefore I say to the Israelites, None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood.
This is a law promulgated by God through Moses, for the Israelites not to eat blood. He explains the reason why is that blood caries life for animals. Moses and the Israelites did not have a modern day understanding of biology and it was not really necessary to explain that some animals do not have blood as we know it. All they needed to know is that they should not eat the blood of animals that have blood. Period. "the life is in the blood" is a very true statement even in the framework of modern science, but it is not limited to blood. They realized plants were alive but did not have blood. So in essence your argument hold NO weight at all.
The problem here is you are trying to read the Bible as a science textbook. That is not the purpose of the Bible. The Bible is written through the minds and hands of men of that day. I am not saying it is in error. Just that it is not an encyclopedia of all knowledge past and present and wasn't meant to be. That is why we say the Bible is God inspired (even the Bible itself says it in II Timothy 3:16-17).
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
"In coming to understand anything we are rejecting the facts as they are for us in favour of the facts as they are. - C.S. Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 2:47 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Faith, posted 03-10-2014 12:33 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 14 of 208 (721573)
03-09-2014 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Faith
03-09-2014 1:04 PM


Both sin and death "entered into the world" by Adam. Sounds like death coming to earth for the first time to me. And that's how it is always treated by orthodox theologians.
Death to man came by the sin of Adam & Eve, not to all of creation. Death occurred in plants, microbes, insects, and other animals before Adam sinned did they not? Adam ate plants, thus killing them. On these plants, the ground, other animals, lived microbes, insects, and small animals that themselves would die by natural means and through contact with Adam. Adam carried gut bacteria and other organisms in and on his body that went through a life and death cycle, did they not. See where this is going?
Where do you draw the line what organisms lived forever and which ones died before Adam sinned?

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
"In coming to understand anything we are rejecting the facts as they are for us in favour of the facts as they are. - C.S. Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Faith, posted 03-09-2014 1:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 03-10-2014 12:42 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 15 of 208 (721574)
03-09-2014 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
03-08-2014 9:57 PM


As I also said, plants are not regarded as living OR dying in scripture as animals and humanity are, so you are imposing a contemporary definition on scripture.
Yes, in the Hebrew, the word life or living is 'nephesh', which differentiates human and animal life from non-human/animal life. Specifically it ties in the fact that these animals breath air using lungs and have blood circulatory systems. That is why in Genesis 1, the land animals with 'nephesh' are differentiated from other forms of life including sea creatures and plants. They did not have our modern comprehension of biology, so this is how they described life. However, they understood that plants though different lived and died, flourished and withered away. Same thing with the sea creatures.
I believe the primary reason they differentiated them is in support of the scriputure which discusses God breathing into man the breath of life. Only animals with lungs and humans had this capability and thus were 'nephesh'.
However, how does this tie into your concept that physical death did not enter any of creation until the fall of Adam? You seem to be grasping at straws and doing mental gymnastics, pulling scripture from both the OT and NT to back up this belief.
You specifically and rather emphatically interpreted that scripture as "spiritual death" which is consistent with your claim that Adam only died a spiritual death as a result of the Fall, while his physical death was normal and inevitable and unrelated to the Fall, as if God had created us all with physical death as part of our life. Although you are not keeping this as clear as it should be, sometimes leaving it vague enough for me to keep stumbling over your terminology, this as I understand it is the crux of our disagreement.
My inclination is that physical death was a by-product of the fall along with spiritual death, but I am not ruling out that the focus of the fall was primarily on spiritual death. Will do more research and get back to you on this.
but I don't agree that physical death was in any way a natural part of God's creation, but that it entered as a result of the Fall, as did spiritual death, in fact the death of the whole being, and of the whole Creation
"on the whole Creation" bit is confusing me, since you said that plants died before the Fall. Are plants not part of Creation??
For starters everyone is BORN into spiritual death because of the Fall, and only if redeemed by Christ do we begin to regain the spiritual life which Adam lost,
Original sin. I agree with, but with more of a Wesleyen interpretation.
John Wesley writes:
Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually."
However, the rest of your discussion, I for the mostpart agree with.
The wages of sin can include disease which is part of physical death.
I see this as part and parcel with physical death. Disease and death are like horse and carriage. You don't have one without the other. Scientifically speaking death through just old age and the naturally deterioration of the body is also possible but for the sake of brevity I group that in with disease.
But the problem in all this is that it is basically a straw man argument -- IF you are claiming that I've said ONLY physical death is the result of the Fall.
Ok, I am just making sure we are on the same page.
I have not denied spiritual death at all ever anywhere in this discussion, but you have denied that physical death is the result of sin and the Fall.
Not denied physical death of humans so much as focused emphasis more on spiritual death than physical death.
There is no need to convince me of the importance of spiritual death, but physical death is always the end result of this physical life for all humanity due to sin, and that is implied in all the discussions of death even where spiritual death is the focus.
Ok, no harm no foul.
If sin brings both physical and spiritual death, then the Fall brought both physical and spiritual death, as I've been saying. Since you posted this link maybe you are no longer claiming that the Fall did NOT bring physical death? Or what?
Did I actually come out and say that the Fall did not bring about physical death of humans? If I did it was not intentional. I do have questions of why there would be a tree of life in Eden though. To me this seems to imply something else as far as man's mortality before the fall. Not saying I am certain on this, just saying it leaves it open for debate.
Why else did He need to become "incarnate" which means embodied, in human form? So He could redeem our entire being both spiritual and physical which was ALL corrupted at the Fall, and die the death both physical [rather brutally in His case] and spiritual ["My God My God why have You forsaken Me?] The whole point of His physical death was to redeem our sin-corrupted BODIES, which isn't to say that was ALL He died to redeem of our human nature.
Ok, I understand the point you are making, and pretty much agree with this. However, I think the emphasis of his death is not on saving our physical mortal bodies but on saving our immortal souls in our newly transformed bodies.
Again, you seem to be imputing to me a straw man notion that says ONLY physical death was the result of the Fall and ONLY physical life the result of Christ's salvation. Not true.
Not trying to invoke a strawman, just trying to comprehend what your belief is.
But it does seem that YOUR argument is that ONLY spiritual death was the result of the Fall and ONLY spiritual life the result of Christ's salvation, with the resurrection of the body just a sort of meaningless bonus gift from God or something like that.
Not exactly the way I would have worded it. The Fall brought on a separation of our souls from God and eventually death to our physical bodies and that through salvation our immortal souls are saved, and after physical death our immortal souls in our new glorified bodies will live eternally in heaven.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
"In coming to understand anything we are rejecting the facts as they are for us in favour of the facts as they are. - C.S. Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 03-08-2014 9:57 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by GDR, posted 03-09-2014 7:11 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024