Why Are There Fossils?

[Salty]

so the teacher has another way of failing you in you HS science class

 

[Van]

Phillip: Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden on the sixth day, the very day that they were created. They were given only the fruit of the trees for food. After the fall they were expelled from the garden and we're not told what they ate then, but we know that one of their sons raised livestock, perhaps sheep, and it's reasonable to assume that they ate them. As for the plants, obviously they die when they are picked and/or eaten. The Hebrews were forbidden to eat blood because, as the Scripture says, the life is in the blood. It seems very apparent that the "death" of a plant or its' fruit is not considered the same as the death of an animal or a person. As for Adam and Eve, physical and spiritual death happened at the same time. For their children and all mankind since we are born into this world already spiritually dead and in the process of dying physically.

I apologize if I seemed to be saying that you were promoting the Day-Age theory, but I know that many Christians do accept that concept - many I'm sure to avoid being criticized as some kind of religious fanatic. For me, anything other than a literal 6 day Creation detracts from God's glory. And yes, I am well acquainted with Job 38. Obviously, no man was here to be a witness to what God did, but we have His description of the Creation which is that He created the Earth and all the rest of the Creation in six regular days out of absolutely nothing. I know that science can't incorporate supernatural events into theory or testing, but they haven't provided any evidence for an alternative to the Creation account. On the contrary, much scientific evidence exists to challenge the evolutionary paradigm.

Phillip

So death occurred before the fall, just not spiritual death due to sin. We can agree on that.

 

[Phillip Diller]

No, that's not what I said, or what the Bible says. Adam and Eve died spiritually at the moment that they disobeyed, and they began to die physically at the same time. There was NO DEATH before that time. Read Romans 5:12 again. It is not vague or parabolic. Sin brought death to Adam and Eve and all their descendants, and at that time God cursed the creation for Adam's sake which brought death on all things - plants, planets, animals and stars. This is not a difficult concept to grasp - death came as a consequence of mans' sin!!! If you can't take the book of Romans seriously how are you going to trust the gospels? If God couldn't create the universe and man in six normal days, as the Scripture plains claims, then how can we believe that He raised Jesus from the dead, or that He can raise us from the dead?

Phillip

 

[Phillip Diller]

Now, let's go back to the original question; Why are there fossils? First of all, for a plant or animal to become fossilized it must be buried, and that burial must be sudden enough and deep enough to preserve the remains from scavenging and other deterioration long enough for minerals to replace the original materials. You're not going to find a T-rex that died and was buried by the gradual processes of uniformitarianism. It takes a catastrophic event to do that. Now it is true that such events do happen today, but the scale of the event/events that would bury huge numbers of large creatures in vast strata formations of the same geologic age on widely separated continents has never been seen in our world apart from the Biblical Flood of Noah's day. And yet, uniformitarianism is the reigning paradigm in modern geology. In the fifth century BC, Plato wrote: "Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught falsehoods in school. And the person who dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and a fool". Today we are taught that the present is the key to the past, and the one who objects is called a religious zealot and a science denier. If the circular reasoning of men like J. E. O'Rourke ("The rocks do date the fossils but the fossils date the rocks more accurately") constitutes science then I will gladly accept the label of a science denier. Real science, however, is about letting the facts lead us to the truth whether we like it or not, not using the method to try to prove what we have chosen to believe.

Phillip

 

[Phillip Diller]

The next question to consider is how all those fossils, that modern geology by uniformitarian reasoning can't explain, still exist? We know that, on average, erosion destroys consolidated exposed rock at the rate of 40' in 50 million years. This is a rate greater by far than the accumulation of sediments in the ocean basins. So even if there had been local, catastrophic events that could bury animals as big as dinosaurs, the fact remains that normal erosion would quickly and easily destroyed them. There is no rational explanation for how strata that is presumed to be 65 million years old can still exist. So, why are there fossils?

Next I have questions about how scientists decide how old the strata and their fossil contents are.

Phillip

 

[Phillip Diller]

The simplest and best description of empirical science that I have ever heard is: The objective, systematic analysis of observable, repeatable processes. Radiometric dating, at best, is forensic science and a poor version of that. There are many forms of this mechanism and ALL of them are based on AT LEAST four unknown and unknowable factors. There is so much room for bias and so little opportunity for verification that it is absolutely amazing that any serious scientist would trust the results of any of them. Worse still, they are demonstrably unreliable.

Today I'll deal briefly with Carbon 14 dating. Generally speaking, C-14 is used to date artifacts that contain carbon, and since living things (carbon-based life forms) exchange carbon with their environment it is assumed that the ratio of C-14 to C-12 in the artifact tells us how long ago that plant or animal died. Most other radiometric mechanisms are used to date non-organic specimens. The process is simple enough. C-14 forms naturally in the upper atmosphere when free neutrons from space strike the nucleus of a nitrogen atom and dislodge a proton, changing it to an unstable carbon atom. C-14 has a half-life of 5,730 years and eventually returns to nitrogen. The normal ratio of C-14 to C-12 (stable atmospheric carbon) is 1 to 1 trillion, thus it is assumed that a ratio of 1 to 2 trillion in a specimen indicates that it has been dead for approximately 5,730 years.

So, what could possibly go wrong with this process? Well, first of all the question must be answered "What was the C-14 to C-12 ratio at the time the plant/animal was alive?". Actually, we don't even know what that ration was 100 years ago, much less what it was when our specimen died. The C-14 process has only been in use for about 70 years. Secondly, we know that SPR of C-14 is affected by solar activity, above ground nuclear explosions, volcanic activity and by the strength of Earths' magnetic field. It has been claimed by Richard Lingenfelter that the atmospheric inventory of C-14 is increasing by as much as 25% per year. That means that C-14 has not yet reached equilibrium. It has been calculated that C-14 should have gone from zero to equilibrium in about 30,000 years. Furthermore, even with AMS technology C-14 cannot be measured beyond 10 half life cycles, and yet we find C-14 in coal samples from all over the world and in diamonds, all of which are believed to be older by orders of magnitude than the 100,000 years reach of our detection equipment. And finally, though there are other issues with carbon dating, the method has been used on specimens whose true age was known and it produced results that were wildly inaccurate. Instead of evolutionary scientists abandoning a thoroughly unreliable method they choose to keep the results they like and explain away the ones that they don't like - the usual answer is that the unacceptable results were the result of sample contamination or calibration errors.

Next we'll consider the non-carbon mechanisms. It only gets worse from here.

Phillip

 

[robycop3]

Fossils don't form overnight, Sportzz Fanzz. The closest thing we have for that is when a footprint of an animal or person is left in some types of mud & is rapidly filled in with sediment before it can deterioriate, & that sediment swiftly hardens.

Human remains from 3K or more years ago have been found in the ground, and are still bone; it had not been replaced with stone, as dino fossil skeletons are.

The La Brea tar pits near LA have yielded up a vast number of animals that are now extinct, such as saber tooth cats, dire wolves, & mastodons. It's estimated that 99% of all animal species that ever lived are now extinct.

But Scripture says Noah had at least one pair, male & female, of EVERY land animal & bird aboard the ark. So, most of the extinct animals such as dinos lived & went extinct before God made man.

Now, many of those extinct animals were better-equipped to survive than corresponding species of today. For instance, the woolly mammoth could live in a variety of climates, unlike today's elephants. The leading cause of wild elephant deaths is their teeth wearing out so they can't adequately chew their food enough to be able to digest it. The mammoth had much-harder teeth than today's elephants, & we don't see much wear in their remains. So, WHY DID THEY GO EXTINCT, UNLESS A GREAT CATASTROPHE HIT EARTH BEFORE MEN WERE HERE, BEFORE NOAH'S FLOOD ? Same for many other animals better-equipped to survive than their corresponding present animals, such as short-face bears, cave lions that could live in cold climates, or the famous saber tooth cat (It was not a tiger) that could live in a variety of climates & hunt any animal up to the super-bison, which was somewhat larger than the present-day bison. SOMETHING destroyed those critters before man was here !

 

[Phillip Diller]

Fossils don't form overnight, Sportzz Fanzz. The closest thing we have for that is when a footprint of an animal or person is left in some types of mud & is rapidly filled in with sediment before it can deterioriate, & that sediment swiftly hardens.

Human remains from 3K or more years ago have been found in the ground, and are still bone; it had not been replaced with stone, as dino fossil skeletons are.

The La Brea tar pits near LA have yielded up a vast number of animals that are now extinct, such as saber tooth cats, dire wolves, & mastodons. It's estimated that 99% of all animal species that ever lived are now extinct.

But Scripture says Noah had at least one pair, male & female, of EVERY land animal & bird aboard the ark. So, most of the extinct animals such as dinos lived & went extinct before God made man.

Now, many of those extinct animals were better-equipped to survive than corresponding species of today. For instance, the woolly mammoth could live in a variety of climates, unlike today's elephants. The leading cause of wild elephant deaths is their teeth wearing out so they can't adequately chew their food enough to be able to digest it. The mammoth had much-harder teeth than today's elephants, & we don't see much wear in their remains. So, WHY DID THEY GO EXTINCT, UNLESS A GREAT CATASTROPHE HIT EARTH BEFORE MEN WERE HERE, BEFORE NOAH'S FLOOD ? Same for many other animals better-equipped to survive than their corresponding present animals, such as short-face bears, cave lions that could live in cold climates, or the famous saber tooth cat (It was not a tiger) that could live in a variety of climates & hunt any animal up to the super-bison, which was somewhat larger than the present-day bison. SOMETHING destroyed those critters before man was here !

Phillip: A cowboy boot was found in Texas with a human foot inside that had fossilized. The boot was in good enough condition that its' manufacturer could be identified and a member of the family that owned the company identified the stitch pattern as that of a boot first made in 1950. The point is that fossilization can happen quickly when conditions are right; time is not the most important factor.

You are correct that Noah was to take at least two each of every air-breathing animal into the ark, but it is only an assumption that dinosaurs were not included. After all the Scripture does not say that the animals that went into the ark were full-grown adults. And since all air-breathing animals, except birds, were created the same day as Adam and Eve (Genesis 1:24-26) there is no warrant for the assertion that the dinosaurs all died before Adam existed. Also, your claim undermines the very words of Genesis 1:31 that says the God looked on all that He had created and declared that it was "very good", and the words of Jesus when He said that Adam and Eve were "from the beginning of the Creation" (Mk 10:6 - quoting Genesis 1:27) and the Apostle Paul who plainly stated that death came as a direct result of Adams' sin. Your claims directly contradict the clear teaching of Scripture and undermine the authority of the Bible. Many scholars consider the claims that you have made to be heresy. I would encourage you to reconsider your worldview and put your trust in the Word of God, and not try to make the Scripture compatible with godless evolution. No real science contradicts the Bible, so we don't need try to reconcile it to the dictates of an ever-changing scientific viewpoint that is dominated by atheists. Put your trust in God, not in the opinions of men.

Phillip

 

[robycop3]

Yes, most CURRENT animals were created on the same day. But5 this world is just a fairly- new arrangement of an old planet. And remember, Scripture says Noah took a pair of EVERY land animal & bird aboard, so if dinos had then exiated, they woulda been brought aboard. (I agree that most of the animals onboard were juveniles, eggs, etc. & they were likely in suspended animation, as chaos woulda ensued, & 50 arks couldn'ta held enough food for all of them. We must use COMMON SENSE here !)

There's no denying those ancient animals existed. But we must look to the beginning of Scripture. The Spirit of God moved over THE FACE OF THE WATERS, so the earth was already here.

No, I don't believe in evolution. Woolly mammoths were better-equipped to survive than today's elephants are, so for elephants to have evolved from mammoths, a retrogression woulda have had to occurred.

Some animals & fish have been around for millions of years. They've changed in size, etc, not species. Ancient alligators were much-larger than present ones, but they were still gators. Horses were once the size of a Collie. And the coelacanth fish is larger than fossil specimens found, but they're the same species, being different only in size. And we've all heard of ancient roaches & waterbugs 6 inches long, & dragonflies with wingspans of over a foot, but, other than size, being identical to today's creatures.

And coal is full of fossils of plants that are now extinct.

I believe God caused fossils to be made to show us a glimpse of past arrangements of earth before He made man.

(BTW, my first name is also "Phillip")

 

[Phillip Diller]

Phillip: Well, Phillip, I'm pleased to meet you. Now these are the points that I agree with you on. First, Noah indeed was to take at least two of each kind of bird and air-breathing animal into the ark with him. And the idea that they were juvenile and/or kept in a state of suspended animation is entirely possible. And the size of the animals and insects found in the fossil record is not entirely surprising. I believe in the Canopy Theory which would have caused the Earth to be a large hyperbaric environment. The water suspended in the upper atmosphere would have been an effective barrier to cosmic radiation and would have caused higher atmospheric pressure. Examination of air bubbles trapped in fossil amber contained 50% higher concentration of oxygen than currently exists. Since insects breathe directly through their skin their size is limited to how much oxygen they can absorb. The ratio of surface area to mass diminishes with increasing size, so those larger insects could not survive in today's environment. Also, the Earths' magnetic field has a half-life of about 1400 years, so that at the time of Noahs' Flood it would have been about three times stronger than today. These conditions may help to explain the long life-spans of the pre-flood patriarch

Now, the situation you describe is at least a variant of the Gap Theory. The word "was" in Genesis 1:2 is the Hebrew word "hayetha" and is typically translated as we find it in the KJV, and can only be rendered to mean a change of state (became) if the context demands it. No such contextual demand exists. It is inexplicable why the Scripture would describe the global catastrophic Flood of Noahs' day in considerable detail, and only a cryptic inference to a similar catastrophe prior to Adams time. Also, the Gap Theory is self-contradictory in suggesting that the Gap catastrophe created the fossil bearing sediments, but not explaining why Noahs' flood would not have obliterated them and left only the remains of plants and animals currently on the Earth. I will trust the words of Jesus when He referred to Adam and Eve as being at the "beginning of the Creation", not millions or billions of years later. May I recommend a couple of books that offer a scholarly examination of the early chapters of Genesis: "Unformed and Unfilled" by Weston Fields, and "Thousands Not Billions" by Dr. Don DeYoung. Take care.

Phillip

 

[robycop3]

First, the layers of strata containing fossils were made & buried long before Noah's flood, & so many of them remained undisturbed.

The earlier catastrophes weren't described in Scripture because there were no men around to either record them or be destroyed by them.

Again, there's no rational denying those ancient animals existed at some time, but had vanished before God made men.

 

[Centrist]

Roby, do you realize how big the Ark would have to be to have 2 of every species on board as well as the supplies to keep them alive? This is where I'm baffled by it. We're talking about a vessel bigger than a modern day nuclear aircraft carrier.

 

[Phillip Diller]

Phillip: Interesting, but not because it is a logical answer. Your first statement, that the first catastrophe produced a vast global system of deep sedimentary layers containing fossils and that a second global disaster left them undisturbed - but you present neither Biblical or scientific evidence for your claim. Nor is there any explanation for why caused the first creation to be destroyed: did the animals sin?

Secondly, you say that the earlier catastrophes weren't recorded because there were no men to record them, and yet most of the first chapter of Genesis describes events that happened when there were no men to record them. And your third statement directly denies the clear declaration of the New Testament that there was no death before Adams' sin. So there is a perfectly rational reason for denying that those creatures lived and died and were fossilized before Adam was created. Otherwise, your post makes perfect sense. Later...

Phillip

 

[timtofly]

Using the idea that the "creation days" were of indeterminate length, the Bible can be understood as consistent with an old Universe and Earth. However, Adam cannot be said to be more than about seven thousand years ago, because the bible gives every generation between Adam and Jesus. Either the Bible is wrong, or the science of dating artifacts created by people capable of abstract thinking, unlike primates, is wrong. The "missing generations" argument (Ross, etc) can push back Adam only by a few hundred years, not 60,000 or more.

My solution is to accept Job 38 and the answer that we were not there, and therefore we do not know.

There is no way in 7000 years can Job 38 back up an argument beyond 7000 years. Especially since in verse 7, two beings are mentioned. They are stars and sons of God. Job 38 can never be used as an argument that angels and humans were not there on that first week. It was a week, because Exodus 20:11 states:

"For in six days, Adonai made heaven and earth, the sea and everything in them; but on the seventh day he rested. This is why Adonai blessed the day, Shabbat, and separated it for himself.

 

[timtofly]

Now, let's go back to the original question; Why are there fossils? First of all, for a plant or animal to become fossilized it must be buried, and that burial must be sudden enough and deep enough to preserve the remains from scavenging and other deterioration long enough for minerals to replace the original materials. You're not going to find a T-rex that died and was buried by the gradual processes of uniformitarianism. It takes a catastrophic event to do that. Now it is true that such events do happen today, but the scale of the event/events that would bury huge numbers of large creatures in vast strata formations of the same geologic age on widely separated continents has never been seen in our world apart from the Biblical Flood of Noah's day. And yet, uniformitarianism is the reigning paradigm in modern geology. In the fifth century BC, Plato wrote: "Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught falsehoods in school. And the person who dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and a fool". Today we are taught that the present is the key to the past, and the one who objects is called a religious zealot and a science denier. If the circular reasoning of men like J. E. O'Rourke ("The rocks do date the fossils but the fossils date the rocks more accurately") constitutes science then I will gladly accept the label of a science denier. Real science, however, is about letting the facts lead us to the truth whether we like it or not, not using the method to try to prove what we have chosen to believe.

Phillip

The point about death has been misunderstood. Death was not natural. Now the question can be raised, can death be artificial? Can perfect humans cause the "death" artificially, and it still be considered as normal and not sin.

No one can even answer that unless they give more than a 24 hour period to work with. All humanity can only speculate.

Now if humans today, can see that while God rested, time was given for the sons of God, yes plural and as many as the stars in the sky, Job 38:7. This time was 1000 years. It was a Lord's Day. For 1000 years even before the advent of the Garden, and God separated out, one human, and called him Adam, the sons of God in a perfect sinless way did whatever was good. Now they did have dominion over all plants and animals. Naturally only the fruit of the trees, and the edible seeds of plants and vines died or were eaten. Genesis 1:29
"Then God said, “Here! Throughout the whole earth I am giving you as food every seed-bearing plant and every tree with seed-bearing fruit."

Even naturally, a seed has to die in the ground to bring more of the same kind. Unless there was a perfect way before the fall. That way we do not know.

The point is artificial death would not be the same as natural death, if God allowed it. We do not know. Even the death of Abel after the fall, was artificial, and without a law of the death penalty. It was artificial at the hands of Cain. It was recorded that Cain's offspring did not live and die. It just multiplied. Until one guy named Lamech, actually confessed to killing another human. Then it seemed he bragged about getting away with it even more than Cain did. That was probably about the point where the sons of God, even Cain's offspring started marrying into the fallen descendants of sinful Adam. We are not given a time table for Cains descendants because they were not cursed to die.

The only time table was from Adam's genealogy, because they were born and they died. God told Moses those dates. Moses recorded them in the book of Genesis.

The thing that God left out, on purpose, was the fact there was a 1000 year period of physical time between Genesis 1 and 2.

God in foreknowledge left it out because Satan was allowed to decieve the whole world, even the elect, into accepting a 14 billion year virtual reality, that could never be refuted by Genesis no matter how much those last day's YEC believers tried. Satan's deception would remain secure until the rapture of the church and the opening of the 6th seal. Revelation 6:12-14
"Then I watched as he broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake, the sun turned black as sackcloth worn in mourning, and the full moon became blood-red.
13 The stars fell from heaven to earth just as a fig tree drops its figs when shaken by a strong wind.
14 The sky receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place.

The virtual reality will be rent from top to bottom. Stars will fall, not like massive balls of fire, but like fig leaves. The two lights in the sky, Genesis 1:14, will be dimmed. And the sky will be rolled back like rolling back the "lid" of a square tuna can. The firmament will be rolled away to reveal true spacetime. Yes, Einstein was shown spacetime. It is the 3 dimensions of a cube bound by the 4th dimension, time. All humanity will witness it, but still all may not understand nor comprehend it. They will finally see God on the throne, and be without excuse that God did create all things the way Genesis 1 declares.

God says that it is time for the testifying church to know and prepare. To pray the the kingdom to come, and God's Will to be done. Many lost souls to still be gathered into the flock. Matthew 9:38. Luke 10:2.

 

[Van]

There is no way in 7000 years can Job 38 back up an argument beyond 7000 years. Especially since in verse 7, two beings are mentioned. They are stars and sons of God. Job 38 can never be used as an argument that angels and humans were not there on that first week. It was a week, because Exodus 20:11 states:

"For in six days, Adonai made heaven and earth, the sea and everything in them; but on the seventh day he rested. This is why Adonai blessed the day, Shabbat, and separated it for himself.

Even though we do not know, some argue we know its not this or that.

 

[Van]

No, that's not what I said, or what the Bible says. Adam and Eve died spiritually at the moment that they disobeyed, and they began to die physically at the same time. There was NO DEATH before that time. Read Romans 5:12 again. It is not vague or parabolic. Sin brought death to Adam and Eve and all their descendants, and at that time God cursed the creation for Adam's sake which brought death on all things - plants, planets, animals and stars. This is not a difficult concept to grasp - death came as a consequence of mans' sin!!! If you can't take the book of Romans seriously how are you going to trust the gospels? If God couldn't create the universe and man in six normal days, as the Scripture plains claims, then how can we believe that He raised Jesus from the dead, or that He can raise us from the dead?

Phillip

First, Romans 5:12 supports my view, spiritual death (separation from God) occurred because of Adam's volitional sin, not physical death. To claim the plants Adam, Eve and the animals ate did not die physically is absurd. Physical death existed before the Fall.

And for you to question my faith is disgusting. Ad hominem arguments are logical fallacies, and are used by false teachers.

 

[Phillip Diller]

Roby, do you realize how big the Ark would have to be to have 2 of every species on board as well as the supplies to keep them alive? This is where I'm baffled by it. We're talking about a vessel bigger than a modern day nuclear aircraft carrier.

Phillip: Here is an explanation from Henry Morris who was a professor of hydraulic engineering. "The dimensions of the ark were ideally designed for both stability and capacity. It has been shown hydrodynamically that the ark would have been practically impossible to capsize and would have been reasonably comfortable, even during violent waves and winds. Assuming the ancient cubit to be only 17.5 inches (the smallest suggested by any authority), the ark could have carried as many as 125,000 sheep-sized animals. Since there are not more than about 25,000 species of land animals known (that is, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians), either living or extinct, and since the average size of such animals is certainly much less than that of a sheep, it is obvious that all the animals could easily have been stored in less than half the capacity of Noah's ark, each pair in appropriate "rooms" (literally "nests")."

If, as many claim, that all dogs were bred from wolves than Noah didn't need to take any dogs at all. In fact there may not have been dogs then. And so with other animals. Darwin himself was a breeder of pigeons and claimed to have produced six different varieties from the common wild rock pigeon. So if the ark needed only to carry the basic stock for each kind then there would have been enough room for all the necessary animals, their food, Noah and his family and their food and for the extra animals that were intended for sacrificial purposes. God planned for everything that would be necessary.

Phillip

 

[Phillip Diller]

First, Romans 5:12 supports my view, spiritual death (separation from God) occurred because of Adam's volitional sin, not physical death. To claim the plants Adam, Eve and the animals ate did not die physically is absurd. Physical death existed before the Fall.

And for you to question my faith is disgusting. Ad hominem arguments are logical fallacies, and are used by false teachers.

Phillip: Van, first of all let me apologize to you. I was not questioning your faith, though I can appreciate why you took my comments that way, and I am sorry that I was not more careful with the what I posted. I am asking for your forgiveness. I don't know you and I certainly am in no position to question your faith. As I have said elsewhere in this forum I have known a man for some 50 years who is an aerospace engineer and a believer, who will not even speak to me about Creation and evolution, but I have no doubt about his faith. As a believer I once also believed in evolution. My point in that post is simply that ignoring the clear statements of Scripture opens the door for all kinds of interpretations that are unwarranted and potentially destructive to faith as a whole. Some years ago a study was done by the Southern Baptist Convention that concluded that at least half of young believers who go to Liberal Arts colleges will walk away from their faith within the first year, so it is crucial that we teach our young people that science is biased against God and His Creation, preferring naturalism which has strong atheistic leanings. So, again, my apologies.

Now, to your post. First, I did not say that the animals that Adam and Eve ate didn't die. I said that God does not view the "death" of plants as the same as the death of animals and people, since the Scripture says that the life is in the blood and plants don't have blood. An Genesis does not record that any animal died before God made coverings of skins after they sinned. And after the fall, Adam raised his children to believe in God and to sacrifice to Him. Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it involved the shedding of blood - the innocent for the guilty. Second, I find no warrant for your claim that death preceded the fall. That would mean that God's "very good" Creation included people He made for worship and for fellowship who were already dying. I don't see how this is in any way compatible with either Genesis or Romans. Can you explain further?

Phillip

 

[timtofly]

Phillip: Van, first of all let me apologize to you. I was not questioning your faith, though I can appreciate why you took my comments that way, and I am sorry that I was not more careful with the what I posted. I am asking for your forgiveness. I don't know you and I certainly am in no position to question your faith. As I have said elsewhere in this forum I have known a man for some 50 years who is an aerospace engineer and a believer, who will not even speak to me about Creation and evolution, but I have no doubt about his faith. As a believer I once also believed in evolution. My point in that post is simply that ignoring the clear statements of Scripture opens the door for all kinds of interpretations that are unwarranted and potentially destructive to faith as a whole. Some years ago a study was done by the Southern Baptist Convention that concluded that at least half of young believers who go to Liberal Arts colleges will walk away from their faith within the first year, so it is crucial that we teach our young people that science is biased against God and His Creation, preferring naturalism which has strong atheistic leanings. So, again, my apologies.

Now, to your post. First, I did not say that the animals that Adam and Eve ate didn't die. I said that God does not view the "death" of plants as the same as the death of animals and people, since the Scripture says that the life is in the blood and plants don't have blood. An Genesis does not record that any animal died before God made coverings of skins after they sinned. And after the fall, Adam raised his children to believe in God and to sacrifice to Him. Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it involved the shedding of blood - the innocent for the guilty. Second, I find no warrant for your claim that death preceded the fall. That would mean that God's "very good" Creation included people He made for worship and for fellowship who were already dying. I don't see how this is in any way compatible with either Genesis or Romans. Can you explain further?

Phillip

I agree with all, except one little human interpretation that is not scriptural. Adam did not teach Cain and Abel about a sacrifice of any kind. Adam was booted from the Garden, immediately, Adam was separated from Cain and Abel and God.

Adam was only in the Garden for 30 years. The Bible says that Seth was born at Adam's 130th year. That was 100 years after being ejected. When God named Adam that 130 years started. Cain and Abel were born in those 30 years. Only Cain and Abel were born. Seth was born 100 years after the Garden, and was the 3rd child. Adam and Eve did not have any more than those 3. After those 3 sons, they had more children. It is wrong to add anything to the narrative that is not there.

Cain and Abel were in the Garden with God. We do not know how long. Neither of them were sinners. God said sin was at the door. There was an Angel with a flaming sword at the door. Nothing could get in, not even sin. Yes, after sin was in the world, Abel in the Garden offered up his own works, raising livestock. Cain offered up his own works, fruits and vegetables. Neither type was good or bad. God just favored one over the other. God does favor offerings, just not people. God did talk to Cain a lot it seems. In fact God said Cains offering was without sin, just not favored by God. Cain lacking wisdom could not accept that. God taught both Cain and Abel what they needed to know. They were probably only 15 and 10 when their parents left, who knows? Adding the notion that Adam had time to explain sin to his two oldest sons does not make sense.

We know that God talked with both Cain and Abel, because that is what the Bible says. They were still in the Garden because that is where the animals and plants were. Adam and Eve had to start from scratch, and it took 100 years for them to get to the place they could even have Seth.

Chapter 4 seems to indicate that Abel was barely 20, when his brother killed him. Cain was not even given a wife yet. Even if Abel was closer to 25, they were in no hurry to start their own families. It seems in that family it did not take long for sin to be a destructive factor. 30 years for the dad and less than 30 years for the oldest. Abel was collateral damage of sin.

The number 30 is not taken out of thin air. Jesus the second Adam was 30 when He obeyed and was baptized of his second cousin John. 30 would be the time Adam disobeyed. Cain did not even last that long. I think that Cain was 15, when Adam disobeyed. Cain did not even last 15 years, without letting sin in the door. Now both brothers were no longer in the Garden where the presence of God dwells. No one could get in. Paradise was sent to heaven where the Angel still guarded the entrance.

That ended when Jesus on the Cross told the thief who believed and trusted God. "Today thou shalt be with me in Paradise." A lost theif, who was the first to be saved, was the first human after Cain, to enter Paradise. The rest of the OT saints had to wait 3.5 days.