• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Animals pre-fall in the Garden

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Do the animals we see today look completely different than how they looked in the garden? What need would have there been for fangs, claws, horns and camouflage pattern fur and skin pre death?
 

PreachTony

Active Member
Do the animals we see today look completely different than how they looked in the garden? What need would have there been for fangs, claws, horns and camouflage pattern fur and skin pre death?

I've discussed this topic with some friends before. A lot of it depends on your stance of "death entered the world" meaning the world in general or mankind. Seeing as animals do not have souls in need of salvation, would they have been under the same restrictions as humanity during those early times? You can add in another variable by questioning how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden.

On that issue, I've heard some people argue that they were in the garden less than a week. Others I've heard argue for countless years. (Please note, these are friends of mine, not published authors or high-ranking theologians.) Depending on which answer you side with will determine some of your belief on animals. Did animals die prior to man falling from grace? After all, animals never had grace to fall from.

It's a fun topic to discuss, so long as people remain civil about it.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It seems odd to me that those who argue most vehemently against evolution, then argue that animals had to change (i.e. evolve) with tremendous rapidity after the fall of man.

Rob
 

percho

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I've discussed this topic with some friends before. A lot of it depends on your stance of "death entered the world" meaning the world in general or mankind. Seeing as animals do not have souls in need of salvation, would they have been under the same restrictions as humanity during those early times? You can add in another variable by questioning how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden.

On that issue, I've heard some people argue that they were in the garden less than a week. Others I've heard argue for countless years. (Please note, these are friends of mine, not published authors or high-ranking theologians.) Depending on which answer you side with will determine some of your belief on animals. Did animals die prior to man falling from grace? After all, animals never had grace to fall from.

It's a fun topic to discuss, so long as people remain civil about it.

What grace was it that the man could fall from? What was it he was cut off from? And thereby being cut of from thereof in dying he would surly die?

Was it the grace of life?

How did that, "life," differ from the, "life," the animals, from the gnat to the elephant had?

I've got a lot more questions about this than I do answers.
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
It seems odd to me that those who argue most vehemently against evolution, then argue that animals had to change (i.e. evolve) with tremendous rapidity after the fall of man.

Rob

You confuse macro and micro evolution. If God created a leopard with fangs and spots to hide to hunt he created them to kill. Death entered the world through sin, and sin through Adam. The animals were here already.
 

Rolfe

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Do the animals we see today look completely different than how they looked in the garden? What need would have there been for fangs, claws, horns and camouflage pattern fur and skin pre death?

My Golden Retriever does not look much like a wolf.

Of course, try telling her that...
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Do the animals we see today look completely different than how they looked in the garden?

No, why would they? Does anybody actually argue that animals have evolved since the fall from vegetarians to carnivores?

What need would have there been for fangs, claws, horns and camouflage pattern fur and skin pre death?

Indeed, what need would there be? Why does a shark have jagged teeth? To filter plankton?
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
No, why would they? Does anybody actually argue that animals have evolved since the fall from vegetarians to carnivores?



Indeed, what need would there be? Why does a shark have jagged teeth? To filter plankton?
Since death entered the world through sin, where did they get their meat? What need is there to hide in a sinless world?
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Since death entered the world through sin, where did they get their meat? What need is there to hide in a sinless world?

The Bible says that death spread to men because of sin. It's possible there was animal death before Adam's sin. Why would a lion need fangs and claws, why would a shark need a set of teeth for tearing flesh?
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
The Bible says that death spread to men because of sin. It's possible there was animal death before Adam's sin. Why would a lion need fangs and claws, why would a shark need a set of teeth for tearing flesh?
Romans 5:12 says death entered the world through sin.
To answer your second question, that is the basis for my op given...
Genesis 1:29–30
Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I've discussed this topic with some friends before. A lot of it depends on your stance of "death entered the world" meaning the world in general or mankind. Seeing as animals do not have souls in need of salvation, would they have been under the same restrictions as humanity during those early times?

Romans 8 says all of creation is waiting for redemption.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
We tend to read the bible from our own point of view. We want it to answer our scientific curiosities.

The bible was written in a time and culture where science was not a priority.

The phenomena that we now classify as scientific, back then was attributed to ‘the gods’; they had a theological rather than a scientific worldview.

They also could not even imagine the vastness of the universe or time.
God accommodated himself to communicate to the early Hebrews in a language and cultural style that they could accept and that they were familiar with.

Questions like the one you asked are not really addressed in the text because it wouldn’t matter to those to whom the scriptures were originally written for.

That idea carries on into the NT as well. That question wouldn't pertain to the salvation of man and is inconsequencial to the theological application of scripture, the provision of Jesus Christ to deal with the problem of man's separation from God.

Just sayin...

Rob
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
And yet in spite of the times and cultures of the day God can and has communicated His word clearly and without error through man. God is not inhibited by the culture and understanding of science of the day. That is a cop out.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That is a cop out.
Come on, Rev... let's keep things nice and friendly. :love2:

Use nice words to express your meaning and explain it in ways that reason things out for us.

God is not inhibited but he is accommodating.

Rob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Questions like the one you asked are not really addressed in the text because it wouldn’t matter to those to whom the scriptures were originally written for.

That idea carries on into the NT as well. That question wouldn't pertain to the salvation of man and is inconsequencial to the theological application of scripture, the provision of Jesus Christ to deal with the problem of man's separation from God.

Just sayin...

Rob

I think this is a good point. I don't think Paul had animals in mind when he wrote Romans 5:12 because he knew that animals don't have eternal souls. Therefore, animals could have been dying pre-fall and it would get no recognition from Paul.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Come on, Rev... let's keep things nice and friendly. :love2:

Use nice words to express your meaning and explain it in ways that reason things out for us.

God is not inhibited but he is accommodating.

Rob

I did not mean for that to sound as it now appears to me it could My apologies. The point stands however.


What do you think God meant when in Job He said He hung the earth on nothing.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I did not mean for that to sound as it now appears to me it could My apologies. The point stands however.


What do you think God meant when in Job He said He hung the earth on nothing.
I guess I'm a softy, you're forgiven of my weakness.

That is an observation even the ancient mind could understand.

It's a better concept than the idea that the Earth rests on the back of a huge turtle.

...to which the follow up question would be, "What holds the turtle up?"

And the answer: "It's no use questioning, it's turtles, turtles, turtles, all the way down"

Rob
 
Top