@Ouroboros thank you for the tone of your reply. It is so much easier talking to someone who can keep their emotions in check and answer without the condescension and hostility.
Agreeing to disagree is a much nicer option than some have taken on this thread.
We are all entitled to our view without jamming it down anyone's throat in a threatening or aggressive manner.
Thank you for the question.......
The Creator gave humankind the perfect start. The earth, along with its extraordinary eco-systems was complete long before man ever drew breath. The food provided for all living creatures was perfect food and the air and water were also uncontaminated. Animals were designed with a perpetual life cycle, so death is a natural part of their existence.
Bacteria is a life form and so many bacteria are beneficial to the operation of the body. We know that our whole digestive system relies on it to function correctly. Our bodies and the bodies of all other creatures are crawling with a host of "good" bacteria....all designed to function symbiotically. We couldn't live without them.
Bodily perfection would mean all things were working in perfect balance within a pristine environment....with no pollution of any sort and no bodily imperfection to cause mutations.
As mankind spread his paradise conditions earth-wide (which was the original mandate) humans would encounter different environments and adapt to them as animals had done before him. All these adaptations would have been within the limits that God programmed into each creature according to his design.
I believe that mutations have an environmental cause that facilitate the changes. When the environment changes, living things adapt to the change. This is what we observe. The extent of the change is what we will differ on.
We see this ability to adapt in all living things.....it is a slow but automatic response to environmental factors. Adaptation facilitates life in an altered environment. No? This is the "evolution" that we agree on.
So what changed? According to the Bible....everything changed.
Neither scenario is true.
A perfectly functioning immune system is designed to keep "intruders" out. It doesn't mean that intruders didn't exist, but that human bodies had a defence system designed to detect these 'intruders' and destroy them, without us even being aware that this was taking place. Natural defence barriers kept humans healthy and resistant to any infiltration of foreign bacteria. Hence no disease was possible. Their life, though mortal was not designed to end. As long as they obeyed their Creator there was nothing that could harm them.
When humans rebelled and left their Creator in favor of independently ruling themselves, he in turn removed his protection of them and allowed them to reap the consequences of their choice.
First of all he cursed the ground that would grow their food. His blessing would no longer guarantee their food supply. He would let them supply their own food. They couldn't just wander over to a lush fruit tree in the garden and select their meal. Now they had to cultivate unproductive soil, which would grow copious weeds and thorny plants to compete with any food crops they may plant. Food now came as a result of hard sweaty labor and poor yield.
"Death" was the penalty was for their disobedience. It is not stated "how" the death penalty was implemented. But physical, mental, and spiritual perfection was now lost and the process of cell renewal in their bodies would begin to break down. Aging was never in the original plan for humans, but now their bodies would begin to deteriorate and their immune systems would no longer keep 'intruders' out as perfectly as before. This would facilitate the mutations that bacteria and viruses are known for....a changed environment. Still a measure of protection was there because their bodies were still close to perfection. With each successive generation however, the imperfection and decline would increase. A less than optimum diet from an unproductive earth and a propensity to make bad decisions because of losing their perfect abilities, would take its toll.
We see down through human history that life spans were directly related to how healthy their diet was and the standard of hygiene they kept.
Even today, we see the same thing. Even in countries where food is abundant, laziness and the availability of cheap junk food has caused an epidemic of grossly obese people who are basically malnourished. A malnourished brain is not one that functions well. People are dying from preventable diseases and making drug companies rich through their programmed ignorance. Science cannot abdicate their role in this scenario.
GMO crops are altering the human digestive system. When science interferes with the natural world, trouble always follows. Why? Because profit is always driving their decisions. They are clever at manipulating nature but what is the real cost? At a time when science is supposedly so clever...why are so many still succumbing to cancers, heart disease and neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's Disease? Why is it that all these "breakthrough's" in scientific research never quite materialize into the cures we all need? How much money is poured into these things and we are all still dropping like flies?
All creatures on the ark would have carried bacteria....that is a strange thing for a science savvy person to say. Even you would know that.
You seem to demonstrate as much ignorance about creation as you assume that I demonstrate about evolution.
Please understand that I am not a theistic creationist. I do not subscribe to Christendom's view of anything...period.
Creationists give true Christianity a bad name. One can find the balanced view by taking all things into account. There does not need to be compromise.
The difference between adaptation, which we can call "micro-evolution" cannot be used to stretch it beyond what is seen, even in the fossil record.
The specimen you provided in the pic does not necessarily have to be an evolved species. Why couldn't it have been created with those feathers?
In the Genesis account, the "winged creatures" would have been anything that flew. These came after the living creatures that God began to create in the water. The Genesis account tallies with the order in which living things appeared.
The Genesis "days" were not 24 hour periods, but may well have been epochs of long duration. The Bible allows for all that we see in a reasonable compliance with what science can actually prove.
There is an old earth that God made habitable over a very long period of time. The Bible allows for this too.
But where we part company is where science fact crosses over into science fiction. All of the evidence for their "macro-evolution" theory is based on "micro-evolutionary" evidence. That is where the "might have's" and the "could have's" start creeping into the language. Its subtle, but it's there.
I will never be convinced otherwise no matter how many "proofs" are offered. I am guessing that the same is true for die hard evolutionists. We will each accept what our mind and hearts want to accept...and that is how it should be.
The readers will form their own opinions.
