Re: A PERFECT Creation????

Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:41:07 -0500

Hi Karen,

At 02:33 PM 9/28/98 -0600, Karen G. Jensen wrote:
>
>Mon, 28 Sep 1998 06:02:51 -0500 Glenn Morton wrote:
>
>>
>>To me the actual Hebrew undermines the claim made by Henry et al that there
>>was no death in the universe prior to the fall. Mankind was offered
>>immortality; the animals weren't. Notice that in Romans 5:12 that death
>>passed unto all MEN, it doesn't say 'men and animals'.
>
>
>Romans 5 focuses on man's sin, death, and peace with God. It is Romans 8
>that broadens the perspective to include the whole creation:
>
> For the earnest expectation of the creature waits for
> the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature
> was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by
> reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope,
> because the creature itself also shall be delivered
> from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty
> of the children of God. Romans 8:19-21
>
>And verses 22-23 make that even more clear:
>
> For we know that the whole creation groans and
> travails in pain together until now. And not only they,
> but we ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the
> Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting
> for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

Let me point out that the creation can groan under our mismanagement of the
environment even if death was NOT the additional problem added to creation
at the fall that most young-earthers believe it was. This verse does not
clearly say that death was added to animals when we fell. There are lots
of other implications of the fall that affected animals. Thorns affect
animals and the Bible says that thorns were added to the earth at that time
(according to young-earth theology).

>
>
>>creation of reproductive abilities for the animals argues against a
>>deathless world. Why would animals need to reproduce if they weren't going
>>to die?
>
>I think He knows why.

Why do you think that? reproduction, leads to overpopulation or to a
population that must die. Plants are a limited resource and 100
quadrillion cattle would eat everything on earth.

And when a cow chomped on grass, he would pick up insects like ants,
grasshoppers, aphids etc and chew them up. Are you asserting that insects
could withstand the several thousand pounds per square inch pressure
exerted by bovine teeth, could be swallowed, dipped in the gastric juices
of 4 stomachs and then excreted in dung and live to tell about it? This is
what you must believe if you hold that animals didn't die before the fall.

Could an elephant step on an ant which was walking across a stone surface
and not squash the ant? Chitin only has so much strength and an elephant's
weight would exceed that strength. So, how do you account for this? Was
chitin stronger before the fall? Were ants really superants( kinda like
fire ants) before the fall?

>
> It is as easy for God to create 10 billion cattle as two and if
>>they weren't going to die, He easily could have produced 10 billion sexless
>>cows and been done with it.
>
>But He didn't!

I contend that He didn't because cattle were dying of old age and needed to
be replaced.

glenn

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm