Rom 8:21-22
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
Jhn 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (emphasis added in scripture text)
Talk about a central theme, WOW!
Yes, human death is key to the Gospel. I see nothing in the Bible that indicates animal death plays the same role.
God's first act after pronouncing the curse for Adam's sin was to sacrifice an animal (the first animal death was skins to cover Adam and Eve's sin).
The text does not say it was a sacrifice, and it does not say it was the first animal death. You are adding to the Word of God.
Isa 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
Isa 65:25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust [shall be] the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.
Isaiah is speaking of the state of the affairs after the coming of God's Kingdom at the end of time. Nothing in the text indicates this was the order of things before the Fall.
As Paul clearly states, Jesus Christ's death and resurrection, overcame the penalty of death brought on by Adam's sin.
Right, Adam's sin caused HUMAN death, and Christ conquered it. St. Paul says nothing about animal death.
If evolution was true, Jesus Christ would have had no reason to resurrect Himself because He could have become a spirit being and went straight to heaven.
I don't follow your logic. Please elaborate. I don't see how evolution negates the effects of human sin and the need for Christ to sacrifice himself to remove that sin.
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Yes, Adam would not have died had he not sinned. What does this have to do with animal death?
Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Luk 24:39-40 39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them [his] hands and [his] feet. 41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?
I don't see what any of the passages above have to do with animal death before the fall. Please elaborate.
Rom 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:
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Yes, sin caused human death. I don't see what this has to do with animal death, for the fifth time.
Adam's sin cursed the entire universe. Rom 8:21-22 21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
I don't see any mention of animal death. Sure, creation groans because of Adam's sin, but nothing in the text suggests groaning=animal death. You're adding to the Word of God again.
Jhn 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (emphasis added in scripture text)
Yes, this is one of my favorite passages as well, but what exactly does it have to do with evolution or animal death?
>Nowhere does the Bible say there was no animal death before
>Cain's murder. Romans 5 speaks only of HUMAN death. Accepting
>evolution only requires accepting pre-human ANIMAL death.
So it's your contention then that through millions of years of death and evolutionary change in primates that the first human arose possessing eternal life only to forefeit said eternal life after the events in the Garden of Eden?
That's more absurd than a literal seven day creation story. That's quite a bit more absurd than classical evolutionary theory as well. As I said, attempts at merging the two viewpoints result in the weakest of all philosophical and theological viewpoints.
If the Garden of Eden story is an allegory, what is man's need for salvation?
If the Garden of Eden story is an allegory, at what point do you start accepting the book as real history? After Cain killed Abel? After the Flood of Noah? After Abraham? After Moses? Only the New Testament? Only the four Gospels? Only those parts of the four Gospels which you agree with (like the Jesus seminar?)? Only "Thou shalt not judge" (like many liberals and atheists??
Perhaps that illustrates the problem for you.
Oddly enough, this really only seems to be a widespread problem among Christians. You don't see many Hindus running around discounting the Vedas or Muslims running around editing the Qu'ran. One wonders why.