A SERIES OF ETCHINGS

In Christian circles the debate over common descent (a.k.a. evolution) has lead to an offshoot debate over the presence of death before sin. The Christian evolutionists have no qualms believing death existed before the sin of Adam. They see death before sin to be compatible with both evolutionary science and the interpretation of scripture. In contrast, Young Earth Creationists (YECs) argue the Bible precludes belief in either common descent or death before sin because Genesis describes a chronological order of events organized by 24 hour days that is irreconcilable with either of these views. Indeed, if death did not exist before Adam sinned, then they are correct to maintain that scripture can in no way be reconciled to an evolutionary process that has creatures dying millions of years before Homo sapiens like Adam ever arrived (of course the assumption is that Adam was indeed a Homo sapien and not an intermediate form).

Among many articles written on this topic there are two that I think summarize the issues rather well. Advocating for the Young Earth view is James Stambaugh, author of the article titled “Death Before Sin?” Weighing in for the theistic evolutionist viewpoint is Gary Emberger who authored a response paper to Stambaugh (and other YECs) appropriately titled “Theological Analysis of Selected Recent Creationist Assertions Concerning the Occurrence of Death before Sin.” In short, Stambaugh believes death did not occur before Adam’s sin, and Emberger believes death did occur before Adam’s sin. What follows is an account of the debate and a summary of the arguments put forth by each man.

Fittingly, the controversial relationship between death and sin begins in the book of Beginnings. Here are what appear to be the main points of contention. In Genesis chapter 1, we read that God repeatedly declared his initial creation to be “very good.” Then in Gen. 2:17, upon creating the heavens, earth, and Adam, we read that God warned Adam of the consequence if he were to ever eat the fruit on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: “…in the day that you eat of it you will surely die” (v.17, NKJV). In the very first verses of the next chapter we are then told that both Adam and Eve partook of that forbidden fruit. Following this act of defiance, the third chapter concludes with an account of the punishment God placed on his rebellious creatures and on the world they inhabited. Interestingly, and despite God’s ominous death threat, this curse does not bring with it the immediate death of either Adam or his accomplice.

Stambaugh (the YEC) finds in the very first lines of the creation account enough evidence to convince him that death could not have occurred before Adam’s sin. He takes God’s declaration of “very good” to mean there was a peaceful coexistence between all life-forms prior to the sin of Adam. If this is true, it is obvious that Genesis cannot be compatible with the modern evolutionary model which has new life-forms resulting from a cruel and violent struggle to survive. However, Emberger takes Stambaugh’s interpretation of the phrase to be a bit anthropocentric. He says we cannot assume God’s definition of good is our definition of good. Good might in no way connote the absence of death and the struggle for survival. Good may simply mean that the creation is a suitable setting for God to work out his acts of redemption as he directs the history of mankind toward its ultimate purpose.

Another critical point of this debate regards the nature of the death which was threatened to occur if Adam ever ate of the forbidden fruit. To understand death, Stambaugh says it is necessary to realize Adam was created sinless. It follows then, for Stambaugh, that if he was sinless he was not intended to die. Stambaugh does not think it odd that Adam did not physically drop dead the day he sinned. Instead, he argues that Adam’s sin ushered in deadly physical decay as well as instant spiritual death—the physical body, he says, took a while to catch up to his spirit. Stambaugh concludes that if death came after the fall then death was not in God’s original plan for creation. Surprisingly, Stambaugh does concede the point that plants created before Adam’s sin did die, as intended by God. Stambaugh defends his belief in this one particular instance of pre-sin death by pointing out that the ancient Hebrews did not think of plants as being alive because plants lack souls; only humans and some animals were alive in the Hebrew sense of the word.

I do not think Stambaugh realizes he has left room here to include many other animals in the category of death which he admits occurred prior to Adam’s sin; there seems to be no justification for stopping with the plant “kind”. If God declares his creation to be “very good” while soulless plants are withering away, what is to stop one from including soulless bacteria, parasites, insects, fish, or birds to the fray? Is he implying that all these creatures have souls; or that the Hebrews believed such? Stambaugh leaves us with too many questions when he allows for the death of plants at the exclusion of other “lower” life forms.

Emberger, the theistic evolutionist, thinks Stambaugh’s position is weak. He points out that although scripture links Human death to Adam’s sin, this is never the case for animals. He says there is no clear biblical teaching that says animals die as a result of Adam’s sin. Furthermore, Emberger argues that when God warned that sin will bring death, there is ample support in the gospel of John and epistles of Paul to justify the conclusion that the death God spoke of was a spiritual rather that physical death. The portions of scripture Emberger refers to make the paradoxical statement that God gives life to people who are biologically already living. He argues that unless these statements are to be taken as nonsense they must mean that God gives spiritual life to those who are spiritually dead.

The discussion of death and sin eventually leads Stambaugh into contemplation over the logical underpinnings of the atonement. He reasons that since sin was the cause for unnatural death, then death was in no way part of God’s intended plan for Humanity. God, in order to put his creation right, devised the atonement so that death could be eradicated. The implication for Stambaugh is this: If we adopt the view that death occurred before Adam’s sin, then the concept of sin itself is called into question; for, if sin did not cause death then there is no sin, and therefore no need for Christ’s atonement. Stambaugh’s logic is that the presence of death before sin would negate the very need for the Christian message. If this isn’t making sense, you’re not alone. Here are Stambaugh’s own words:

“If we believe that death has always existed, then we make a mockery of the death of Christ. This is exactly what evolution means…If death is not the penalty for sin, then Christianity is meaningless. The death of Christ was made necessary because of man’s sin. Man’s sin brought death, which in turn brought God’s Son to pay the penalty in our place.”