<<I have been reading comments from people asking questions about death in
the beginning of Adam and Eve's stay in the garden of Eden. The various
comments reflect an apparent difficulty in linking sin with death.
Maybe it's just that the concept of sin has become fuzzy over the
years. Sinning means going against God's will. God being Justice as
well as Love cannot tolerate desobedience. Life in the garden was
carefree...except for one detail: He told Adam and Eve they could have
everything but should not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and
evil...or else..."you will surely die".
The implication of that rather graphic remark is clear: death in the
garden of Eden was avoidable...otherwise God's threat would have been an
idle one! Careful reading of the first chapter of Genesis reveals a few
interesting details: God created animals and later created man. To
each He says: "...I give every green plant for food." In a place where
death is avoidable God was not about to say to the animals and man: "I
give you one another for food." A moderate amount of thought suggests
that the sort of environment that existed in Eden during the pre-sin era
is one in which neither man nor beast thought of hunting down and eating
one another. Eden was a happy place but not of the happy hunting ground
variety.
Following Adam and Eve's delinquent behaviour death came into the
picture. The first death is reported in Genesis 3: 21 "The Lord made
garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them". God had to
put an end to an animal's life...unless He just borrowed the skin for
awhile...!
Through man, evil entered the world and the whole world felt it. It was
not just man and the animal kingdom that felt the anguish, but nature
also. Genesis speaks of thorns and thistles as competing for the food
that man had to grow in order to survive. Competition was an unknown
concept in Eden.
So, in the begining, God created a perfect Earth within a perfect
universe. This is why He is noted to often say "it is good" God being
Holy would not be able to call "good" something which is evil. The now
famous tree of knowledge was not an ugly smudge in the middle of a
"good" creation. The existence of this tree simply means God created
man free. God put it there because evil existed. But He did say do not
touch it. Freedom is a double edge sword: one is free to do right and
free to do wrong. Adam and Eve were not forced to disobey God. The
serpent merely made a suggestion. If God had not included this tree he
would have deprived man of his freedom of choice. God does not force
goodness down anyone's throat. Man is asked to adhere to it strictly by
choice.
So, as a result of sin, man, animals and nature are all fallen. And
there is nothing that excludes the idea that nature includes all of the
universe. A bit of thought suggests that God most likely heralded the
post-sin era with His principle of entropy. From that time on, the
stars including our Sun were also doomed to die because the universe's
supply of useful energy began depleating i.e. ceased to be upheld by
God.
One must mention that some of the difficulty with what preceeds comes
from trying to wedge in the theory of evolution which suggests a
chronology of events where carnivorous dinosaures (i.e. able and willing
to eat its fellow beast) cavorted the Earth long before man...therefore
that death existed before man existed...therefore downplaying the
seriousness of sin. This bring us back to the problem of freedom being
a double-edged sword....we are always free to be wrong. It just depends
on how intently one listens to the Holy Spirit who interprets
Scripture. Man's little spirit acting alone does not do too well in
that area.
Guy Blanchet
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <asa-owner-Starkja=aol.com@lists.calvin.edu>
Received: from aol.com (rly-yg03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.3]) by air-yg05
(v60.14) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Jul 1999 04:34:39 -0400
Received: from lists.calvin.edu (udomo3.calvin.edu [153.106.4.240]) by
rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (v60.14) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Jul 1999 04:34:35 -0400
Received: (qmail 15539 invoked by uid 27); 19 Jul 1999 08:36:37 -0000
Delivered-To: asa@lists.calvin.edu
Received: (qmail 15533 invoked from network); 19 Jul 1999 08:36:36 -0000
Received: from ursa.calvin.edu (153.106.4.1)
by udomo3.calvin.edu with SMTP; 19 Jul 1999 08:36:36 -0000
Received: from smtp11.bellglobal.com (smtp11.bellglobal.com [204.101.251.53])
by ursa.calvin.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA16267
for <asa@calvin.edu>; Mon, 19 Jul 1999 04:34:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sympatico.ca (ppp9330.qc.bellglobal.com [206.172.166.139])
by smtp11.bellglobal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA18652
for <asa@calvin.edu>; Mon, 19 Jul 1999 04:37:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3792D459.CBE6E33@sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 04:31:38 -0300
From: Guy Blanchet <guyblanchet@sympatico.ca>
Reply-To: guyblanchet@sympatico.ca
Organization: Guy Blanchet
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [fr]C-SYMPA (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Life and death and Genesis
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
Precedence: bulk
>>
Guy shares his faith in scripture, but it seems so divorced from scientific
reasoning. Such stories seek to present explanations for seemingly
untestable questions, but the only test we have is shared reasoning and
consensual agreement. We build such stories on both revelation and
reasoning. Our human inclination to be irrational stems from our own faulty
world views that are used as standards of reference. To build more coherent
world views we need to be more careful on what assumptions we treat as truth
through revelation. All revelation should be tested with shared reasoning.
start with? I suggest that a literal interpretation of the Bible is a choice
that admits too many conflicting assumptions. It is spiritually inspired but
it is not flawless. Rationalizing those flaws becomes and endless task. We
should carefully select those assumptions from the field of all
possibilities. Confining them to just the Bible is a choice.
The first choice should be the existence of a true freedom of choice. It is
not deterministic. The basis for even that choice is our personal world
view, which is is not perfected. Much of science has to deny this existence
in order to engage in controllable research. Confining such research is
understandable. Denying the existence of a non-deterministic freedom is
destructive to the trust that the people have had in science.
A second reasonable assumption is the existence of a creator of the Universe
and all life forms. Personifying this creator seems to be a reasonable
choice, but adding other attributes should be done more carefully. The best
one to add is God is the truth, which is always beyond our feeble brands of
truth.
On the issue of life and death we need to be more careful, Guy. Our
assumptions should not conflict with scientific facts. It appears clear that
all life forms that experience life and death also engage in sex. Immortal
life forms do exist and they do not engage in sex. Why death exists appears
to be part of a designed process set in motion by God.
How life began should not be tied down to historical explanations created by
irrational humans who had some insightful access to revelation of truth. The
idealistic beginning of Eden and our falling from it is a poor choice for
today. We should build up our assumptions more slowly with much more shared
reasoning.
We do seem to need an assumption about the creation of evil. Guy, it depends
on what attributes you choose to assign to God. With the gift of freedom
from God we were not given the ability to make valid moral decisions. We
could not separate good from evil. We all start from a position of ignorance
and a neutral moral understanding. We have not learned how to build coherent
world views as standards for moral judgment. This is why we ar still so
irrational even with all our schooling. All evil appears to have emerged
from human experience. i.e. It is a consequence of that gift of freedom.
Another needed assumption has to do with purpose. What is your purpose in
life, Guy? It would seem that God's intent was to have us individually create
that purpose.
Respectfully yours,
Jim Stark, retired Professor of Mathematic from Lansing Community College.