http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=5321
Could There Have Been Any Death Before the Fall?
If the Bible is from God (and it is1), then we can know that
it is accurate when discussing historical science. In order to
interpret properly the natural evidence, then, one must know what the
Bible teaches about the history of the Earth. There certainly are
differing views about some of the particulars of the biblical Creation
model, based on how one interprets certain passages. Some Scriptures are
not explicit about precisely what happened at various times in Earth
history (e.g., during the Creation week or during and immediately after
the Flood). But the Creation scientist understands the importance of not
contradicting Scripture when attempting to develop a comprehensive
scientific model or framework within which all scientific disciplines
must fit.
That
said, the question of when death on the Earth began can have
implications that affect our understanding of various questions in
Creation science. It is clear, biblically, that humans would not have
died had they not sinned (Genesis 3:22), but what of the rest of the
Creation? If animal death could occur before the Fall (i.e., before Adam
and Eve’s first sin), for example, then we would have to assume that
death was a design feature of the planet from the beginning, rather than
being a part of the Curse placed upon the Earth as a result of the Fall
(Genesis 3:17-19). This concept could affect creationists’ attempts to
understand cases of so called “natural evil,” where, for example,
various living things seem to have been designed to kill (e.g.,
parasitoids, pathogens, and phages). If all death was solely a result of
the Fall, then we would assume that such cases of “natural evil” were
not
part of God’s original design, but were part of the Curse. If death
could, in fact, occur prior to the Fall, then a different response to
some forms of “natural evil” might be more relevant (e.g.,
microevolution and/or diversification, displacement from intended
habitat, or degeneration), although some forms of “natural evil” still
might have been directly due to the Curse.
Also, if death could occur before the Fall, there might be implications
of that fact when we examine the fossil record. Creationists generally
interpret the bulk of the fossils that are found at the base of the
fossil record to be a result of the Flood, since it is thought to be the
first major catastrophic event in Earth history. It is thought that
only local catastrophes happened in the 16 centuries up to the Flood. If
death could occur prior to the Fall, however, then there may be another
catastrophic event of global proportions that could be relevant when
studying the fossil record as well: day three.
According to Genesis chapter one, prior to day three of the Creation
week, the Earth was covered with water. On day three, God created the
dry land and then created grass, seed-bearing herbs, fruit trees—the
plants. Swimming and flying creatures were created on day five, and
finally, land life on day six. It is easy for us to read through this
simplified narrative of what God did on those four days without stopping
to consider the possible geologic implications of His activity. On day
three, God said, “‘Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together
into one place, and let the dry land appear’; and it was so” (Genesis
1:9). This passage may be saying that God, in essence, scraped the
surface of the ocean floor, piling up a massive amount of Earth to cause
some of it to be exposed from the water, forming land.
2 If
so, it seems likely that mudslides would have occurred over the next
several hours and possibly days, due to the wet material from the ocean
floor being raised in elevation and water rapidly running off the
continental surface. This activity could have begun the fossilization
process of some of the plants and aquatic creatures created on days
three and five, respectively. There are other options that would not
have caused such mudslides,
3 but the point is that the
Creation scientist must at least consider the possibility that the
earliest fossils in the record were a result of day-three activity.
So could there have been death prior to the Fall? And if so, are there
theological implications? First, we know that plants were certainly able
to die before the Fall, because they were to serve as food for humans
and animals throughout the Earth (Genesis 1:30). Nobody seems to dispute
that truth. It is argued, however, that plants are not thought to be
“alive” in the same sense as animals. Unlike animals and humans, plants
are never described as being “living creatures” (
nephesh chayyah).
4
God seemed to be making a distinction between kinds of life in Genesis
1:30 when He said, “Also, to every beast of the Earth, to every bird of
the air, and to everything that creeps on the Earth,
in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food” (emp. added). While that is true, it is also true that plants
can die in some sense (Job 14:7-12; John 12:24),
5 which tells us that
not all death must necessarily be regarded in a negative light.
It is true that Adam, Eve, the flying creatures, and the land animals
were told by God originally to be herbivores (Genesis 1:29-30).
6 So it is clear that it was not part of God’s original design plan for there to be bloodshed
by the hand of another,
at least among humans, birds, creeping things, and the “beast of the
Earth” (apparently the land animals created on day six, Genesis
1:24-25,29-30). But that does not mean that catastrophic activity,
natural disasters, or natural death could not have still killed animals.
Some argue that God’s creation could not have been “very good” (Genesis
1:31) if animals could suffer and die, since the creation was perfect.
7 But this assumes (1) that animals, which are soul-less beings,
8
can truly suffer in the same way humans can; and (2) that the creation
could not still be “very good” and there be death. We have already seen
that due to the occurrence of pre-Fall plant death, the creation could
still be deemed as “very good” by God, even with death occurring
simultaneously. So the question then becomes, what did God mean by
calling the creation “very good,” and what kind of death, if any, would
not have been considered “very good” to God? It seems logical to infer
that a “very good” creation simply meant that the created order was
exactly as God intended for it to be, whatever that might be—death or no
death. As one Creation scientist acknowledged concerning the pre-Fall
world, “Although the pre-Fall world was ‘very good’ (Gen. 1:31), it was
not ‘perfect’ (i.e.,
it did not exhibit every meaning of ‘perfect’).”
9 What kind of death was a part of that “very good” creation must be gleaned, if possible, from the text.
It is argued that “Death is ‘the last enemy’ (1 Corinthians 15:26)
which Jesus Christ came and died to defeat. And this would include
animal death.”
10 In the context of 1 Corinthians 15, however,
Paul is not including animals in referencing the defeat of death, but
rather, humans—those capable of sin (vs. 17).
Isaiah 11:6 is sometimes quoted as evidence that there was no animal death prior to the Fall.
11
“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down
with the young goat, the calf and the young lion and the fatling
together; and a little child shall lead them.” The claim is that in the
end, God will restore on Earth the conditions that were in effect in the
Garden, where animals were not violent towards one another. Once again,
however, in context we see that Isaiah 11 is a Messianic prophecy (cf.
vss. 1-5), discussing the coming of Jesus and His kingdom in the first
century using highly
figurative, not literal,
terminology. As evidence, consider that in Romans 15:12, Paul quotes
from Isaiah 11 and applies Isaiah’s prophecy to the first century,
noting that the prophecy had already been fulfilled at that time.
12 Isaiah
may have simply been referring to the peace and harmony that would
exist in the coming Church. In Christianity, for instance, those once
viewed as predators—ferocious wolves, leopards, and young lions—are
often found dwelling peaceably with those who would have once been their
prey. If we understand Isaiah 11 to refer to the coming of Christ and
the Christian dispensation, therefore, we could reasonably conclude that
Isaiah’s prophecy was fulfilled when the Kingdom (i.e., the Church
13) was established in Acts 2.
14
It is also argued that God’s Curse after the Fall included the animals
according to Genesis 3, and by implication, humanity’s death curse would
have applied to the
animals at that point as well.
15 But
that assertion is an assumption—the text does not say that was the
case. Second, the serpent was, indeed, “cursed more than all cattle, and
more than every beast of the field” (Genesis 3:14), implying that the
animals were all cursed, though not as much as the serpent.
But it is also true that the plants were included in the Curse as well (vss. 17-18), and we have already seen that they were capable of death
prior to the Fall.
Arguments have been made from various passages that tell us death was a
result of sin (Romans 5:12-21), that shedding blood is necessary for
the remission of sin, but would not have been necessary, by implication,
without sin (Hebrews 9:22), and that Christ’s physical death and
resurrection made it possible for physical death, initiated by Adam and
Eve, to be destroyed (1 Corinthians 15:21,22,26).
16 Such
passages, however, contextually, are talking about mankind, not animals,
which are not imputed with sin. It is argued that Romans 8:19-22
indicates that the “whole creation”—which is thought to include the
animals—suffers, groans, labors, and is under a bondage of corruption
(vss. 21-22) due to man’s sin, and therefore, that the whole creation
would not have so suffered prior to man’s sin—i.e., animals would not
have suffered death.
17 In the end, however, “the creation
itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the
freedom of the glory of the children of God” (vs. 21, ESV), apparently
returning to a pre-Fall state. Understand that there is considerable
argument over the meaning of the word “creation” in Romans 8—whether or
not it is referring to all of the created order, or merely humans. To
base an entire argument on such a disputed passage would be unwise, to
say the least. It could be argued from the context, that “creation” is
referring to humans—the only ones who can “eagerly wait for the
revealing of the sons of God” (Romans 8:19). More specifically, the “
whole
creation” (vs. 22) could be referring to mankind in general (which
“labors with birth pangs,” referring back to the punishment which female
humans would have due to Eve’s sin), while “creation”
(vss. 19,20,21) could be referring to Christians—i.e., the “sons of God”
whom Paul has been discussing in the preceding verses. After all,
“whole creation” is used in precisely that way—to mean mankind in
general—elsewhere in Scripture. In Mark 16:15 (ESV), for example, Jesus
tells the apostles to go preach the gospel to the “whole creation,”
which is another way of saying to “all nations” (Matthew 28:19) and does
not include animals. Regardless, Romans 8 cannot be used as conclusive
evidence that animals did not die prior to the Fall.
The hallmark passage that seems to be used to try to sustain the idea
that death did not occur prior to Adam and Eve is Romans 5:12-19:
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—(For
until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there
is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses…). Therefore,
as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous (emp. added).
Notice that, contextually, while this passage does discuss death as
being a result of sin, it is clearly referring to humans and the effect
of sin with regard to
mankind, not animals. It was humans, not animals, that were made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), giving them the capacity to sin.
A passage that provides weight to the viewpoint that animals could die
prior to the Fall is Genesis 3:22-24. After Adam and Eve sinned and God
confronted them, pronouncing their punishments and making modest clothes
for them, the text says:
Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the Tree of Life, and eat, and live forever”—therefore
the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden…and He placed cherubim
at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned
every way, to guard the way to the Tree of Life (emp. added).
Notice from this text that man’s ability to live forever was not a
direct miraculous act by God, or something inherent in the physical body
of mankind (i.e., part of God’s original design of the human body),
but rather, was coupled with his
eating from the Tree of Life,
which apparently possessed miraculous healing qualities (cf. Revelation
22:2). The implication is that Adam and Eve could have
still
lived forever, even after sinning, if they were able to access the Tree
of Life and eat from it. That is the very reason why God used cherubim
and a flaming sword to guard Eden and the tree. A further implication is
that physical death was
always possible from the
beginning for anyone (and apparently, anything) that did not eat of the
Tree of Life —i.e., entropy or the Second Law of Thermodynamics was in
place from the beginning, governing the Earth. Adam and Eve were able to
eat from the anti-entropy tree and not be subject to the effects of the
Second Law; but without it, the effects of God’s natural laws would
have taken their course.
With that understanding in mind, what are the implications for the rest
of the living beings on the planet? A straightforward reading of the
text in Genesis 2:9 and 3:22,24 leads us to believe that God made and
placed in the Garden a single fruit tree that, unlike the other fruit
trees throughout the Garden that humans and living creatures could eat
from, had physical life-giving qualities tied to it. Any living being
that did not eat from that Tree would apparently eventually suffer
physical death—hence, the name given to it: “the Tree
of Life.”
18 If
so, could the animals which were created throughout the Earth, which
could not reach the Tree of Life to eat it, live forever? Could the
swimming creatures that God had created on day five eat from the tree?
If not, then how could they live forever? What about all of the animals
that God created, surely spread out over the Earth, playing the crucial
roles for the Earth for which God designed them? Were they able to
access the Tree of Life and live forever? Surely not. If we suppose that
perhaps animals could live forever apart from the Tree of Life prior to
the Fall, we would be going beyond the clear message of the text
regarding the nature of the Tree. God seemed to want to emphasize in
Scripture the fact that He tied eternal life to the Tree of Life.
19 One
would need more biblical evidence before arguing that the animals
received eternal life apart from the Tree. If humans needed the Tree to
live forever and were denied access to it after the Fall, it seems
logical to conclude that the animals were affected in the same way.
Summary
The implication of the text seems clear on the matter: animals
throughout the Earth, not made in the image of God, were never intended
to live forever. They always had the ability to die, from the beginning.
They were designed to die. Like plants, they were not made in the image
of God. Their deaths are not in the same category of importance as that
of humans. No wonder God, Himself, killed animals in order to clothe
Adam and Eve properly (Genesis 3:21), even though there is no indication
that those animals did anything to deserve death. It seems that animal
death, like the “death” of a plant, is not a moral evil, but rather is
part of God’s plan for animals. Notice God’s words to Noah and his sons
after the Flood. After sanctioning the killing of animals as food for
humans, God highlighted an important distinction: “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for [i.e., because] in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6, emp. added). Human death is said to be significant, because we, unlike animals, are like God.
With this understanding about life and death in place, it becomes
important to consider the possibility that some of the fossils in the
record could have been from day-three activity. We can also see that
some cases of “natural evil” among the animals may have been in place
from the beginning. Calling such cases “natural evil” is, therefore, not
appropriate. It cannot be said to be “evil” at all, if it was part of
God’s design for those creatures all along.
The world was designed to serve as a “vale of soul-making”
20 for
humans. It was intended to prepare them for the afterlife, giving them
an opportunity to make their choice about where they will spend
eternity. A fundamental component of that design for the Universe is
life and death. As part of our studies on Earth, while preparing for the
afterlife, God seems to want us to understand life and death and their
ramifications. We simply cannot escape death. Everywhere we look,
whether by the naked eye or when studying bacteria under a microscope,
we are reminded of mortality. It is clearly important to God for humans
to acknowledge the reality of death. It appears that even before their
first sin, Adam and Eve were capable of observing the evidence around
them that death was a real thing—that God knew what He was talking
about. They could know, by His mercy, they were not being subjected to
death. They could understand the concept about which God was warning
them: “in the day that you eat of it, you [also—JM] shall surely die”
(Genesis 2:17). When they sat on an ant, it could die. When a sauropod
dinosaur stepped on a snake, the snake was not protected from death by a
force field. Rather, the dinosaur’s weight would most certainly crush
it, in harmony with God’s natural laws.
A wise man certainly “regards the life of his animal” (Proverbs 12:10),
but he also understands that humans are different from animals.
According to Jesus, we are “of more value” than them (Matthew 6:26;
10:31; 12:12; Luke 12:24). Those who submit to the will of God in faith
will be able to live forever, spiritually (John 3:16); but not the
animals. They were never intended to live forever. They serve as a
reminder that we should seek life (John 10:10).
Endnotes
1 Kyle Butt (2007),
Behold! The Word of God (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
2 NOTE: This is, no doubt, an oversimplification of what
could have actually occurred on day three if God created land from sea
floor material. God could have used basaltic rock from the base of the
ocean to form the granitic rock that comprises much of the land
continents today. Granitic rock is less dense, causing it to float
higher in the mantle (exposing land), while the basaltic rock of the
ocean floor tends to float lower in the mantle, lowering the sea level.
3 It is possible that the Earth was completely made of water
to this point, and God created the infrastructure of the Earth on day
three, including the core, mantle, and crust, from that water (2 Peter
3:5), rather than raising material from the sea floor. There would
likely be no mudslides if He chose to create land in this way.
4 Ken Ham (2014), “Was There Death Before Adam Sinned?” Answers in Genesis On-line, April 25,
https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/was-there-death-before-adam-sinned/.
5 Jeff Miller (2012), “Did Jesus Contradict the Law of Biogenesis in John 12:24?” Apologetics Press,
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=106&article=1590.
6 Kenneth Ham (1991), “Adam and Ants,”
Acts & Facts, 20[9].
7 Avery Foley (2015), “Did Adam Step on an Ant Before the Fall?” Answers in Genesis On-line, December 4,
https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/did-adam-step-on-an-ant-before-fall/.
8 Bert Thompson (2001),
The Origin, Nature, & Destiny of the Soul (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press),
http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/e-books_pdf/onds.pdf.
9 K.P. Wise (2014), “Spectra of Perfection: A Case for Biological Imperfection before the Fall,”
Journal of Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences, 4:28, emp. added.
10 Foley.
11 Ibid.
12 Bible scholar Homer Hailey highlighted that Isaiah 1l:10
is quoted by Paul “and applied to the present time under Christ in which
the Gentiles hope in Him (Rom. 15:12). If the prophecy is not now
fulfilled, the Gentiles have no hope. But they abound in hope at this
present time (Rom. 15:13); therefore, the passage is now fulfilled.”
(2006),
Prayer and Providence (Las Vegas, NV: Nevada Publications), pp. 177-178.
13 Matthew 16:18-19; Daniel 2:31-44.
14 Mark 9:1; Colossians 1:13; Revelation 1:9; Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 10:7.
15 Foley.
16 Ibid.; Ham (1991).
17 Foley.
18 Why would God give it that name if its purpose was not to sustain life? Further, if living beings could live forever
without the Tree of Life, what would be the point of the Tree?
19 Genesis 2:9; 3:22,24; Revelation 2:7; 22:2,14.
20 John Keats (1895),
The Letters of John Keats, ed. H. Buxton Forman (London: Reeves & Turner), p. 326.
 |
 |
|
Suggested Resources |
designated
every May 22 as gay day, which public schools (K-12) are expected to
celebrate. [The day is officially called “Harvey Milk Day” in honor of
Mr. Milk, a 1970s homosexual activist (Tran, 2009).] On July 14, 2011,
California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill into law that “require[s] public schools in the state [of California—
