Your explanations trying to fit millions of years into the Bible..... and trying to fit death into scripture before sin, end up destroying the Gospel. If physical death already existed before sin... then why did Christ need to physically die and be resurrected? If the curse in Genesis 2 was only a spiritual death to Adam, then Christ only need to rise, or defeat, spiritual death. Clearly, in 1 Cor. 15:26, physical death was part of the curse which Christ conquers.
The Bible attributes physical death to sin...specifically referring to Adam. And here is the Gospel....
1Cor. 15: 21 "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"Also see Rom. 5:12-19
CabinetMaker....To imagine that Genesis 2:17 is not referring to physical death, (as you claim) is refuted in Genesis 3:19 "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
Physical death ...returning to dust, IS part of the curse. It is something that Christ has defeated and we can join Him in the resurrection. "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Rev. 21:4
The beast had already fallen before Eve and then Adam, he was already evil, already working against Gods will. So your theory falls apart before it gets started. But like so many of inconsistencies of Christian theology, there is a willingness to just ignore mater of fact statements left in the scripture books by the authors. Away from the garden Cain knew of a world where death was already in existence, he feared it, God agreed with him.
Your explanations trying to fit millions of years into the Bible..... and trying to fit death into scripture before sin, end up destroying the Gospel. If physical death already existed before sin... then why did Christ need to physically die and be resurrected? If the curse in Genesis 2 was only a spiritual death to Adam, then Christ only need to rise, or defeat, spiritual death. Clearly, in 1 Cor. 15:26, physical death was part of the curse which Christ conquers.
The Bible attributes physical death to sin...specifically referring to Adam. And here is the Gospel....
1Cor. 15: 21 "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"Also see Rom. 5:12-19
CabinetMaker....To imagine that Genesis 2:17 is not referring to physical death, (as you claim) is refuted in Genesis 3:19 "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
Physical death ...returning to dust, IS part of the curse. It is something that Christ has defeated and we can join Him in the resurrection. "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Rev. 21:4
If Jesus defeated physical death, why do we all still die? If Christ defeated physical death, why does Jesus tell us not to fear death but to fear the one who can destroy the soul?
Evil is not something sitting in the corner smoldering as in some substance or spiritual essence. Evil has no substantial, ontological existence.
Matthew Henry is helpful here:
Spoiler
But, It had two extraordinary trees peculiar to itself; on earth there were not their like.
[1.] There was the tree of life in the midst of the garden, which was not so much a memorandum to him of the fountain and author of his life, nor perhaps any natural means to preserve or prolong life; but it was chiefly intended to be a sign and seal to Adam, assuring him of the continuance of life and happiness, even to immortality and everlasting bliss, through the grace and favour of his Maker, upon condition of his perseverance in this state of innocency and obedience. Of this he might eat and live. Christ is now to us the tree of life (Rev. 2:7; 22:2), and the bread of life, John 6:48, 53.
[2.] There was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, so called, not because it had any virtue in it to beget or increase useful knowledge (surely then it would not have been forbidden), but, First, Because there was an express positive revelation of the will of God concerning this tree, so that by it he might know moral good and evil. What is good? It is good not to eat of this tree. What is evil? It is evil to eat of this tree.
The distinction between all other moral good and evil was written in the heart of man by nature; but this, which resulted from a positive law, was written upon this tree. Secondly, Because, in the event, it proved to give Adam an experimental knowledge of good by the loss of it and of evil by the sense of it. As the covenant of grace has in it, not only Believe and be saved, but also, Believe not and be damned (Mk. 16:16), so the covenant of innocency had in it, not only "Do this and live,’’ which was sealed and confirmed by the tree of life, but, "Fail and die,’’ which Adam was assured of by this other tree: "Touch it at your peril;’’ so that, in these two trees, God set before him good and evil, the blessing and the curse, Deuteronomy 30:19. These two trees were as two sacraments.
The tree was not evil, nor good. It was a tree with no special properties apart from being set apart by God for holy use. The partaking of it by Adam and Eve gave them knowledge of their sinful act, and the evil consequences therein. The tree can be no more evil or good than a can of gasoline. It is the use made of the thing by moral agents that comes good or evil consequences.
The knowledge of good and evil, has a distinct meaning in the Old Testament. It refers to the ability to determine for one's self what is good and evil, what is helpful and harmful. In 1 Kings 3:9 Solomon prays for it so he can rule well. In Deuteronomy 1:39 little children don't have it yet. In 2 Samuel 19:35 senile people have lost it (Note: it is translated "discern between good and evil," but when we look at the Hebrew word behind "discern", it is the very same word as used in Gen 3:5 to mean "knowing" [good and evil]. So, there is no difference between the two.)
In fact, both Trees were sacramental in nature; but as with later sacraments, the two sacraments functioned differently. Concerning Gen.2:15-17, Keil & Delitzsch brilliantly summarize as respects the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (on Gen.2:15-17):
The tree of knowledge was to lead man to the knowledge of good and evil; and, according to the divine intention, this was to be attained through his not eating of its fruit. This end was to be accomplished, not only by his discerning in the limit imposed by the prohibition the difference between that which accorded with the will of God and that which opposed it, but also by his coming eventually, through obedience to the prohibition, to recognise the fact that all that is opposed to the will of God is an evil to be avoided, and, through voluntary resistance to such evil, to the full development of the freedom of choice originally imparted to him into the actual freedom of a deliberate and self-conscious choice of good.
By obedience to the divine will he would have attained to a godlike knowledge of good and evil, i.e., to one in accordance with his own likeness to God. He would have detected the evil in the approaching tempter; but instead of yielding to it, he would have resisted it, and thus have made good his own property acquired with consciousness and of his own free-will, and in this way by proper self-determination would gradually have advanced to the possession of the truest liberty. But as he failed to keep this divinely appointed way, and ate the forbidden fruit in opposition to the command of God, the power imparted by God to the fruit was manifested in a different way. He learned the difference between good and evil from his own guilty experience, and by receiving the evil into his own soul, fell a victim to the threatened death. Thus through his own fault the tree, which should have helped him to attain true freedom, brought nothing but the sham liberty of sin, and with it death, and that without any demoniacal power of destruction being conjured into the tree itself, or any fatal poison being hidden in its fruit.
Within Scripture, evil and sin are never considered as "things" or "not things." They are considered to be actions and consequences. Per the full counsel of Scripture evil is relational, not material.
Evil is a broader category than sin. Sin creates and leads to evil. Cancer is a great evil that is the result of sin generally (not anyone's sin in particular save Adam's, e.g., John 9) but is not sin. All sin is evil, but not all evil is sin.
Sin is the action (lawlessness, e.g., 1 John 3:4) and evil is its consequence.
Satan denied the goodness of God in his rebellion. Said denial of the good is evil. Evil is an ethical state of said denial, thus, the privation of the good. The temptation of Satan brought Adam into this evil state. When Adam partook of the fruit he engaged in an ethical act of rebellion. Hence, the fall of Adam and all his progeny is not some ontological event, but an ethical event. Adam embraced no substantial thing called "evil". Instead when Adam turned from God and the good, he denied the good. In that denial of the good lies the ethical act which was evil—a want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.
From Scripture we see God on display as such a great and good God that evil acts do not defeat Him (Gen. 50:20; Romans 8:28), rather God uses evil to bring about the greatest good, as especially in the death of Our Lord, wherein lies the death of death for God's people. God's supreme wisdom is such that in both the use and defeat of evil He brings about more in Christ Our Lord than we ever lost in Adam.
We believe that this good God, after he created all things, did not abandon them to chance or fortune but leads and governs them according to his holy will, in such a way that nothing happens in this world without his orderly arrangement.
Yet God is not the author of, nor can he be charged with, the sin that occurs. For his power and goodness are so great and incomprehensible that he arranges and does his work very well and justly even when the devils and wicked men act unjustly.
We do not wish to inquire with undue curiosity into what he does that surpasses human understanding and is beyond our ability to comprehend. But in all humility and reverence we adore the just judgments of God, which are hidden from us, being content to be Christ's disciples, so as to learn only what he shows us in his Word, without going beyond those limits.
This doctrine gives us unspeakable comfort since it teaches us that nothing can happen to us by chance but only by the arrangement of our gracious heavenly Father. He watches over us with fatherly care, keeping all creatures under his control, so that not one of the hairs on our heads (for they are all numbered) nor even a little bird can fall to the ground without the will of our Father.
In this thought we rest, knowing that he holds in check the devils and all our enemies, who cannot hurt us without his permission and will.
For that reason we reject the damnable error of the Epicureans, who say that God involves himself in nothing and leaves everything to chance.
Whatever we do, let's not try to "rescue" God from the problem of evil via false theodicies, as do the open theists and others. Every time we try to make God's actions completely "reasonable" (to our finite minds) we run roughshod over the Book of Job and the cross.
God is not morally liable for evil, but we cannot say exactly what His relations are—it is beyond our capacity. Nevertheless, there is much we can say from James, causality, etc., but we can't give an exhaustive answer. How this all works we leave to the mind of God which is, as WCF 2.1 and elsewhere says,"incomprehensible."
At this point, we trust in God's goodness. Let's remind ourselves that we can know that what God has done is right and good, because God did it. The thought that we would have done things differently shouldn't function as an indictment of God, but as a grateful reminder that God is the judge of all the earth, that God is goodness itself, that (in a word) He is God, and we are not. And so where we cannot explain or where we do not understand, we can still rest and resist our itching ears for things contrary to Holy Writ. God has given significant help to the weakness of our faith in this regard by making clear that He is not the author nor the approver of sin.
True as all this may be, my comment was in reference to Isaiah 45:7. God said He created evil. However you care to look at evil, Gos is sovergien over His creation.
If*Jesus defeated physical death, why do we all still die? If Christ defeated physical death, why does Jesus tell us not to fear death but to fear the one who can destroy the soul?
You gloss over the fact that physical death is part of the curse. We are shown that to be true both OT & NT.*
Why do we die? We die because of sin and the curse. We live in a sin cursed world where all creation groans. But, because Christ defeated physical death in the physical resurrection, we too will be physically resurrected. (1 Cor. 15)
You ask why Jesus said not to fear death. I think you know the answer. It is because there is a resurrection of the dead. "And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment" Heb. 9:27
I don't believe that it was. As Caino related, there were others outside of the land that Cain and God knew of. Physical death is not a curse for to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
Why do we die? We die because of sin and the curse. We live in a sin cursed world where all creation groans. But, because Christ defeated physical death in the physical resurrection, we too will be physically resurrected. (1 Cor. 15)
That is why our souls die. Our bodies die because we fell or got old or murdered or any number of reasons. Your soul dies because you reject Jesus and if your soul is dead, there will be no resurrected body worth living in.
You ask why Jesus said not to fear death. I think you know the answer. It is because there is a resurrection of the dead. "And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment" Heb. 9:27
Many young people reject the Bible and Christianity over the evolution issue. PEW Research did a large study of college age 'kids' who grew up in Christian homes who no longer attended church. There of course was many reasons but what stood out was poor answers from parents and church over our origins. Many in this group thougt The Bible was Gods Word... but we needed to pick and choose what to believe. (For ex... perhaps Christs resurrection was not physical)
Yep, I've seen this happen. You have some kid raised in a fundamentalist environment who's been told by his parents, his church, and creationist orgs like AiG that there are no transitional fossils, evolution can't produce new genetic info, radiometric dating is useless, scientists admit evolution is a failed theory, and so on. Then the kid goes to college, takes a few courses and sees for himself that transitional fossils are ridiculously abundant, conducts experiments where he sees new functional genetic sequences evolve right in front of him, learns the actual methodologies of radiometric dating, sees the congruent results himself, reads the papers where these quotes come from and sees how the creationists dishonestly edited them and took the out of context....
...he sees all that and realizes he's been lied to. He also sees that "millions of years" and evolutionary theory aren't some anti-god plot by satanic Darwinist scientists, but are nothing more than the results of good science. Then he puts that together with the fact that his family, church, and creationist org's have told that it's one or the other....Christianity or the science he's seeing with his own eyes. He has to choose. As you note, and as the data shows, significant numbers of these kids elect to walk away from Christianity.
Then, just as clueless as before, the creationists blame the university system. As if it's the school's fault for exposing kids to reality.
Enoch and Elijah didn't die, they were translated. More inconsistencies with the sin curse theory. This world isn't our permanent home anyway, we never were going to be immortal from birth. The material of our bodies must stay here on this earth.
That is one of many things you deny in scripture. Denying that physical death is a result of the curse, is just one of many compromises to scripture evolutionists make. Part of the curse is that our bodies will die...return to the dust. Gen. 3:17-19.*
CabinetMaker said:
As Caino related, there were others outside of the land that Cain and God knew of.
Caino believes in aliens. He thinks thinks he is above God, deciding what to accept as truth from the Bible.*
CabinetMaker said:
6days said:
Why do we die? We die because of sin and the curse. We live in a sin cursed world where all creation groans. But, because Christ defeated physical death in the physical resurrection, we too will be physically resurrected. (1 Cor. 15)
That is why our souls die. Our bodies die because we fell or got old or murdered or any number of reasons. Your soul dies because you reject Jesus and if your soul is dead, there will be no resurrected body worth living in.
You claimed evolutionism does not destroy the gospel. You have created your own 'gospel'. *Our bodies die because of sin. ( Genesis 3). *Read 1Cor. 15 and Romans 5. Because Christ defeating physical death at Calvary, all will physically arise at the resurrection of the dead, and kneel before Him at the judgement. *Your beliefs eliminate the purpose of Christs physical death and resurrection.*
CabinetMaker said:
6days said:
You ask why Jesus said not to fear death. I think you know the answer. It is because there is a resurrection of the dead. "And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment"*Heb. 9:27
Cabinet.... are you serious or just trying hit a daily word quota? Or,... maybe I am not getting your point? There will be a physical resurrrection of the dead...then judgement. Jesus tells us there are two destinations. "He will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels". .... And you ask why you should fear that?
That is one of many things you deny in scripture. Denying that physical death is a result of the curse, is just one of many compromises to scripture evolutionists make. Part of the curse is that our bodies will die...return to the dust. Gen. 3:17-19.* Caino believes in aliens. He thinks thinks he is above God, deciding what to accept as truth from the Bible.*You claimed evolutionism does not destroy the gospel. You have created your own 'gospel'. *Our bodies die because of sin. ( Genesis 3). *Read 1Cor. 15 and Romans 5. Because Christ defeating physical death at Calvary, all will physically arise at the resurrection of the dead, and kneel before Him at the judgement. *Your beliefs eliminate the purpose of Christs physical death and resurrection.* Cabinet.... are you serious or just trying hit a daily word quota? Or,... maybe I am not getting your point? There will be a physical resurrrection of the dead...then judgement. Jesus tells us there are two destinations. "He will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels". .... And you ask why you should fear that?
I have already explained my view on what death means in Genesis. That has not changed.
My view is not a new Gospel as my view changes nothing in Christ's Gospel of salvation.
Finally, I am asking you to deal with this verse in its entirety. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
God can resurrect a body so physical death is nothing to fear.
Yes you have explained that you reject what God tells us...that our bodies returning to dust / death is part of the curse. You reject the curse in Gen. 3 believing death already existed for *millions of years... which compromises the Gospel and the purpose of Christ's death and resurrection. In your version of things, you essentially have Adam telling God the curse is no biggie since he was going to die anyways. In your version of things, pain, sufferring and thorns already existed.*
CabinetMaker said:
Finally, I am asking you to deal with this verse in its entirety.
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
God can resurrect a body so physical death is nothing to fear.
With your last statement though, you seem to demonstrate how evolutionism destroys the gospel. Yes...God can resurrect a body. *God can do anything.... but He can't do anything against His nature. If God could physically raise the dead, and defeat the curse, without sending His Son to the cross, He would
have. *Physical death / shed blood is the penalty for sin. "In fact, according to the law of Moses, nearly everything was purified with blood. For without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness". Heb. 9:22
In the OT, blood of a pure innocent lamb was sacrificed as a temporary atonement of sin. There was a physical death that was a consequence and penalty of sin. In the NT, the pure innocent Lanb of God.was sarificed as an atonement for sin. But Christ defeated physical death with a physical resurrection. Without Christ we would have physical death as a result of sin and then a Christless eternity.*
Evolutionary beliefs weaken or destroy the gospel. Evolutionism is the belief that God created through a process of pain, suffering, death and extinctions calling it very good. Evolutionism believes that physical death is not a penalty for sin, which makes the sacrificial death of Christ meaningless.*
Yes you have explained that you reject what God tells us...that our bodies returning to dust / death is part of the curse. You reject the curse in Gen. 3 believing death already existed for *millions of years... which compromises the Gospel and the purpose of Christ's death and resurrection. In your version of things, you essentially have Adam telling God the curse is no biggie since he was going to die anyways. In your version of things, pain, sufferring and thorns already existed.*
Cabinet...it was answered.*
With your last statement though, you seem to demonstrate how evolutionism destroys the gospel. Yes...God can resurrect a body. *God can do anything.... but He can't do anything against His nature. If God could physically raise the dead, and defeat the curse, without sending His Son to the cross, He would
have. *Physical death / shed blood is the penalty for sin. "In fact, according to the law of Moses, nearly everything was purified with blood. For without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness". Heb. 9:22
In the OT, blood of a pure innocent lamb was sacrificed as a temporary atonement of sin. There was a physical death that was a consequence and penalty of sin. In the NT, the pure innocent Lanb of God.was sarificed as an atonement for sin. But Christ defeated physical death with a physical resurrection. Without Christ we would have physical death as a result of sin and then a Christless eternity.*
Evolutionary beliefs weaken or destroy the gospel. Evolutionism is the belief that God created through a process of pain, suffering, death and extinctions calling it very good. Evolutionism believes that physical death is not a penalty for sin, which makes the sacrificial death of Christ meaningless.*
Your foundation is faulty from the outset, rather you should focus on the purpose of Christ's life, not the Pagans negative theory about his death as a human sacrifice. Besides, his material body died, it's normal, but he didn't die, he returned to say hello and goodbye before returning to his rightful place on high. He had already explained to the right wingers who killed him that he would allow them to kill his body yet return 3 days later to prove his authority to teach. Jesus never taught blood sacrifice for sins, he taught sincere repentance and a new heart through faith.
Yes you have explained that you reject what God tells us...that our bodies returning to dust / death is part of the curse. You reject the curse in Gen. 3 believing death already existed for *millions of years... which compromises the Gospel and the purpose of Christ's death and resurrection. In your version of things, you essentially have Adam telling God the curse is no biggie since he was going to die anyways. In your version of things, pain, sufferring and thorns already existed.*
I do not agree. Physical death is not the curse, separation from God is the curse. Evolution only weakens the Gospel to those who focus only on the physical and ignore the spiritual. Christ came to redeem is to His Father so that we might once more walk with God. My personal opinion is that creationism weakens the Gospel as it turns God into a magical Genni that need only to snap His finger and poof, it is done. I do not see God as a Genni.
Cabinet...it was answered.*
With your last statement though, you seem to demonstrate how evolutionism destroys the gospel. Yes...God can resurrect a body. *God can do anything.... but He can't do anything against His nature. If God could physically raise the dead, and defeat the curse, without sending His Son to the cross, He would
have. *Physical death / shed blood is the penalty for sin. "In fact, according to the law of Moses, nearly everything was purified with blood. For without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness". Heb. 9:22
In the OT, blood of a pure innocent lamb was sacrificed as a temporary atonement of sin. There was a physical death that was a consequence and penalty of sin. In the NT, the pure innocent Lanb of God.was sarificed as an atonement for sin. But Christ defeated physical death with a physical resurrection. Without Christ we would have physical death as a result of sin and then a Christless eternity.*
Evolutionary beliefs weaken or destroy the gospel. Evolutionism is the belief that God created through a process of pain, suffering, death and extinctions calling it very good. Evolutionism believes that physical death is not a penalty for sin, which makes the sacrificial death of Christ meaningless.*
That's how it was misremembered or perhaps changed later after the human sacrifice doctrines of Romanized Christianity overwhelmed the original gospel of Jesus.
In my religion this is what he actually said at the last supper:
"As they brought Jesus the third cup of wine, the “cup of blessing,” he arose from the couch and, taking the cup in his hands, blessed it, saying: “Take this cup, all of you, and drink of it. This shall be the cup of my remembrance. This is the cup of the blessing of a new dispensation of grace and truth. This shall be to you the emblem of the bestowal and ministry of the divine Spirit of Truth. And I will not again drink this cup with you until I drink in new form with you in the Father's eternal kingdom.”
"When they had finished drinking this new cup of remembrance, the Master took up the bread and, after giving thanks, broke it in pieces and, directing them to pass it around, said: “Take this bread of remembrance and eat it. I have told you that I am the bread of life. And this bread of life is the united life of the Father and the Son in one gift. The word of the Father, as revealed in the Son, is indeed the bread of life.” When they had partaken of the bread of remembrance, the symbol of the living word of truth incarnated in the likeness of mortal flesh, they all sat down." UB 1955
"After they had engaged in meditation for a few moments, Jesus continued speaking: “When you do these things, recall the life I have lived on earth among you and rejoice that I am to continue to live on earth with you and to serve through you. As individuals, contend not among yourselves as to who shall be greatest. Be you all as brethren. And when the kingdom grows to embrace large groups of believers, likewise should you refrain from contending for greatness or seeking preferment between such groups.”
"When Jesus had thus established the supper of the remembrance, he said to the apostles: “And as often as you do this, do it in remembrance of me. And when you do remember me, first look back upon my life in the flesh, recall that I was once with you, and then, by faith, discern that you shall all sometime sup with me in the Father's eternal kingdom. This is the new Passover which I leave with you, even the memory of my bestowal life, the word of eternal truth; and of my love for you, the outpouring of my Spirit of Truth upon all flesh.”
In the original gospel taught for 3+ years before Gods Son and messenger was rejected and killed, he taught salvation by faith. God was already forgiving, it was never conditional to the murder of Jesus. God never needed anyone to pay a price, we have always been his children.
Luke 7:50
48Then He said to her, "Your sins have been forgiven." Those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this man who even forgives sins?" 50 And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."
I have skimmed this thread, and I'm sorry to interrupt. I just almost finished watching A&E's "Big History", which sucked me in at first, but the third disk was all about evolution.
Basically in one episode, they said that we "evolved" to lay eggs (aka, placentas). They also said that we "evolved" to stand up "over the weeds". But in the same show they specifically stated that "since we don't have claws and fangs", that we "evolved" to have broad shoulders so we could throw spears (to hunt for meat). So, if evolution is correct, why did we not "evolve" to have claws and fangs to capture our meat?
I just feel this particular case for evolution is invalid. If they claim that we evolved to lay eggs and stand up, why did we not develop claws and fangs?
Also, this is not a vegetarian issue. The show specifically stated that we "evolved" to have broad shoulders to throw spears for meat.
It's because according to the theory, our ancestors were tree-dwellers that fed mostly on fruits or other vegetation. For a comparison, chimpanzees and other primates are good ones. Primates don't have claws, and because that is the branch of animals that humans come from neither do we. Primate hand design is perfect for climbing and using tools, but not great for scratching things. Basically, evolution will play to an organism's strengths: our ancestors already had solid shoulders, hands and arms; but no claws to speak of. So instead of evolving claws from scratch we simply built on what we already had.
As for fangs, we do have them. Your canine teeth are what's left. They are much bigger in wild primates, but are not normally for eating meat. They use them for fighting, self-defense, and breaking down tough vegetation like bamboo stalks.
We don't have sharp teeth because the human diet is way more diverse than that of most animals. We have different teeth for different kinds of foods. Our teeth actually do show a more carnivorous shift over the course of the hominid fossil record
Evolutionary beliefs weaken or destroy the gospel. Evolutionism is the belief that God created through a process of pain, suffering, death and extinctions calling it very good.
Tell me, how can there be new life if there is no death? Do you think the Earth can sustain unlimited growth? That if nothing died and births keep happening, the population of all species wouldn't grow rapidly out of control?
True as all this may be, my comment was in reference to Isaiah 45:7. God said He created evil. However you care to look at evil, Gos is sovergien over His creation.
"Creating Evil" in the passage there is pointing to the Lord bringing judgment. A word commonly used in that verse for evil is calamity. A judgment brought about by the Lord for a nation's sin. This is plain from the juxtaposition "I make peace and create evil.." The calamity (evil) here is war.
Calamity can always be termed 'evil'. Here in Isaiah this calamity is good, God makes it happen, creating the evil of punishment. Consider also the plagues of Egypt, which were good calamities, but not sin, which is a moral evil.
But evil cannot always be termed calamity.
Accordingly, Isaiah 45:7 cannot be used as an affirmative claim that God created sin.
The work of creation is God's making all things of nothing, by the word of his power, in the space of six days, and all very good.
Lastly, of course God is sovereign over evil, as testified to by Joseph to his brothers. While the immediate works of Joseph's brothers was moral evil (sin), God's work in the long-run was good. What happened to Joseph, from God's perspective and plan, was not the end. The end was beginning the work of building His people and His nation and God used the moral evil (sin) of His brothers to bring about that good consequence.
Evidence points to our Designer. Monkeys are designed to live in trees. Whales are designed to live in the ocean. The human hand is a marvel of engineering... The worlds best engineers and designers have not been able to build anything close to competing with the God made version.
The human hand is a marvel of engineering... The worlds best engineers and designers have not been able to build anything close to competing with the God made version.
The chimpanzee hand competes pretty well with it. I'm fairly certain robotic hands do as well. Do you actually have anything to back up your statement here?
Or,... maybe I am not getting your point? There will be a physical resurrrection of the dead...then judgement. Jesus tells us there are two destinations. "He will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels". .... And you ask why you should fear that?