If death is the result of sin, why do animals die?

by Orgull 64 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  V

  This fact is the silver bullet to the sin=death concept.

  Animals not only die: they also get complex deseases, congenital disorders (from birth), and fight among their own species.

  "And God got to see that [it was] good"...did he?
• 

  nvrgnbk

  Always wondered about that myself.

  The more thought one gives to things, the more JW teachings fall apart.

  Either death is natural or it's not. Which is it?

  That's the one thing that we all know. Everything living one day shall die.

  I found this interesting:

  http://centerfornaturalism.blogspot.com/2007/07/will-soul-survive.html

  Friday, July 06, 2007

  Will the soul survive?

  Yale psychologist Paul Bloom (author of Descartes' Baby) said in a New York Times editorial back in 2004 that "The great conflict between science and religion in the last century was over evolutionary biology [natural selection vs. intelligent design]. In this century, it will be over psychology, and the stakes are nothing less than our souls." The Times science section on evolution a few weeks ago included a piece on the science of the soul which suggested he might be right:
  
  

  For many scientists, the evidence that moral reasoning is a result of physical traits that evolve along with everything else is just more evidence against the existence of the soul, or of a God to imbue humans with souls. For many believers, particularly in the United States, the findings show the error, even wickedness, of viewing the world in strictly material terms. And they provide for theologians a growing impetus to reconcile the existence of the soul with the growing evidence that humans are not, physically or even mentally, in a class by themselves.

  Consciousness and our mental life, including reasoning and imagining, seems the last redoubt of dualism, and therefore, possibly, of supernaturalism. If we can come up with a transparent explanation of how the operations of the brain entail subjective experience, then we'll have pretty much closed the case on the soul and rehabilitated the reputation of "mere" matter. We'll see how the brain does everything the soul was supposed to do, short of surviving death. But clear and testable definitions of mental phenomena are so elusive, and theories of consciousness so arcane (thus far), it's unlikely that the soul will be put out of a job anytime soon. It just isn't at all obvious how one gets pain, for instance, out of neurons, even though a naturalist would insist there's nothing "spooky" going on. Absent a clear physicalist-functionalist account of our mental lives that a layperson can grasp, the concept of the soul will live happily on, no doubt, giving aid and comfort to those who want to be more than just physical.
  
  In the article, theologians Nancey Murphy and John Haught try to reconcile the soul with science, but don't give much comfort to dualists since they admit we're basically material creatures. The soul, as they describe it, becomes pretty much a metaphor or vague untestable concept, very much like god in liberal theology. But it's a way to soften the blow of naturalism, permitting the use of a word that inevitably retains supernatural and immaterial connotations.
  
  Despite best efforts of hard-nosed scientists and philosophers, the transition to naturalism will likely be by very slow and halting degrees since the required change in our self-concept is so radical. Part of that transition will involve the gradual redefinition of words and phrases with dualistic implications (self, soul, spirituality, religion, free will, responsibility) in a more naturalistic, non-dualistic direction. If the soul survives under naturalism, it will mean something quite different from what it does now.

  posted by Tom Clark at 10:05 AM
• 

  sir82

  When I was younger, I had a dog.

  He would try to hump darn near anything that moved, and quite a few things that didn't.

  Clearly showing he had not put on the new personality, was covetous and immoral, and thus merited death.

  He did not respond to my preaching efforts.

  Through "community responsibility", all members of the animal kingdom are thus liable to be punished by the hand of God.

  Next question?
• 

  JosephMalik

  The bible tells us that death is the result of sin. Logically if Adam and Eve had not sinned they would not have died.

  Orgull,

  Not only would they have died, they did die. Sure we now can say that sin killed them but how? Because they were denied access to the tree of life. This would have prevnted their death even after such sin entered into the world. Ge 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: That is what you are missing. Man, animals, die without such provision just as you have observed. Saying they were perfect as some teach does not prevent it. Only this provision by God or something equivalent to it can do that. Today that provision is Christ.Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. This life is one of human immortality. Ro 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
  Joseph
  
• 

  nvrgnbk

  You get the award, sir82!

  Whatever the hell it is! LOL!

  Way too funny!

  I think deaconbluez should do a QFR about this.
• 

  sinis

  I suggest you read up on the Sumer "myths" of Enki and Enlil. Enki made animals and man and has been equated to Satan. Enlil (made the earth and "Eden") dispised man and tried to exterminate him because they were too numerous and noisy - he has been equated to Jehovah. Yet Abrams, father Tarah worshiped Enki as had been the tradition of his forefathers, but when Abram reached his age to choose a god he chose Enlil or Jehovah. Hmmm, why would the jews pick a god who hated man? Enki in affect is the savor but in Christainty has equated him to Satan, yet the two are brothers. A rift came about when one brother was elevated to a higher position from their father An, which also coorelates to the Jewish texts of El Elyon. Which interestingly coincides with Greek,Roman, etc. mythology of Zeus/Jupiter/Uranus, etc.

  To answer your question I believe that death was not always here, at least not from the outset, which is alluded to in Jewish and other ancient texts. It was when the "Gods" became angry that life spans were reduced as is seen with the Sumer legends of Enki and Enlil, and the Pantheon counsel that oversaw man. Energy does not become nothingness, assuming we all have souls, who is to say that the energy does not become of a higher order? Now I don't believe in "Heaven" or "Pardise", but what of other dimensions? Dimensions where everything coexists without the decaying prison known as the body...

  The reason I suggest Sumer "myths" is that they are the oldest known culture on the planet - hmmm maybe there's more to believe there than a religion compiled some 6000 years plus after the fact. Also knowing that Abram -Abraham lived in Ur a Sumer city. So why is the Jewish version correct when it obviously is a spin off from Abram of Sumer texts which appear to be the actual originators? In fact the "tower of babel" in the Jewish language means "confusion" perhaps a parady? When the actual Sumer name means "Gates of the Gods". Hmmm why would the Jews make fun of an incident that appearently happened at that city? In Sumer legend Nimrod boasted of being an offspring of the gods -a (like Hercules, or other demigods) demigod and was smiten because of something he was trying to accomplish. Were the Jews poking fun at history because they entertained a rivel god? Was the building that Nimrod was building REALLY the reason for the "confusion" when he and his people could have went to a mountain in the area and been closer to the heavens than any man made zigguret? Appearently Nimrod was building over the legendary city of which Enki had once inhabited.

  I find it interesting on how it becomes more convaluted the more you dig. The Bible is just one version (or word of mouth) of deeper occurances that happened in that local.

  Ever wonder why the Book of Enoch, Sumer texts, Roman and Greek, etc. etc. have so many similarties such as 12 Titans, demigods, etc.? Makes you wonder.
• 

  MadTiger

  This fact is the silver bullet to the sin=death concept.
  
  Animals not only die: they also get complex deseases, congenital disorders (from birth), and fight among their own species.
  
  "And God got to see that [it was] good"...did he?
  
  
  
  
  
  Silver bullet back in gun.
• 

  Sad emo

  Spiritual death (ie permanent seperation fromGod) is the result of sin, not physical death.
• 

  sinis

  Spiritual death (ie permanent seperation fromGod) is the result of sin, not physical death.

  Yet that is not what the bible says.
• 

  Quandry

  I thought that man was given the gift of life and that animals weren't given this same gift so the animals lived and died but humans were made to live forever as long as they did not eat of the fruit causing death.