Evidence that the Fall in the Garden was Spiritual
One of the primary criticisms of Old Earth views of the universe stems from the introduction of death into the world. According to a young earth perspective, God created the world perfect, and in that perfection there was no sin, and therefore no death. Death was introduced by Adam’s and Eve’s disobedience in the garden. Therefore, because death was not in the world before the fall, evolution would be impossible, because the theory of evolution is based on fossils that are thought to have died long before the fall. If the reasoning is correct, then this contradiction is clear proof that evolution is a fallacy, that the earth is young, and God truly means to communicate that in scripture. It is certainly something that should be believed if it is what God did, but as I have documented elsewhere on this blog, the scientific evidence is far too complex in form to have been created in the short time YECs believe we have been here. Furthermore, the complexities in what science has found is so ordered as to suggest a timeline of events, a timeline that can only be true if the earth is old.
Now, there are several arguments about why God does not mean to describe a young in scripture. This post will only address one of them, and that is the topic of death. Was the fall in the garden about physical death? And if not, then what was it about?
Now, I have written on this topic before, in Death did not Enter the World Through Sin. There, I described my position on the Bible’s teaching of death as follows:
One of the examples of the Bible’s authority is its teachings on death. If I may paraphrase, the idea is that through one man (Adam), death entered the world; through one Man (Jesus), death was conquered. That’s it, and you know what? I believe it! But, here’s the thing… I believe the Bible is referring to spiritual death, not physical.
I then point out that we still experience our physical death, even in Christ. When we are saved, it is an eternal death that was conquered, and replaced with eternal life. I then go on to argue that…
God told Adam that on the day he ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, Adam would surely die… yet he did not physically die. On the other hand, his body did begin to decay but that merely leads to death; it is not death per se. His real death was separation from God, and that happened on the day he ate the fruit, just as God foretold.
Now, my thinking has matured on this point a tad… I do not believe as strongly that the decay of Adam’s body was triggered by the Fall. It may have been, but nothing in my world view hinges on it, and so I take no official position.  However, let me point out that was not until some time after the Great Flood when God limited people’s lives to approximately 120 years. But this aside, my primary point about Adam’s separation from God still stands. However, my argument was rooted mostly in logic; sound logic, but logic. In that vein, I then close with this:
Ken Ham points out that the first recorded physical death was God killing an animal to make clothes for Adam and Eve. [I then ask] why wasn’t that death wrong? Isn’t that funny? Of course, one could argue, and correctly so, that such a death would not have been necessary had Adam and Eve not sinned. So, can’t you say this physical death is a consequence of sin? I suppose so, but it was not a necessary consequence. God could have snapped up an animal skin without ever killing one… but He didn’t. In fact, He killed the animal to cover up Adam’s nakedness. The first recorded death was therefore to cover up sin; it was an expression of holiness and not sin, for only holiness can cover sin. Therefore, physical death, while often a response to sin, is not sin itself, lest Christ’s own death be in vein.
Let me add to this that God didn’t have to cover them at all, because they were already covered in leaves. So again, the death was unnecessary from a practical standpoint, but quite necessary if God was to model the idea of death covering sin.
Death covering sin? Yes Absolutely! The death of that animal covered sin; the death of sacrifices covered sin; Christ’s death covers sin. Where a YEC teaches that without the introduction of sin there is no physical death, the Bible teaches that without physical death, there is no covering of sin! Can sin cover itself? Clearly not, yet manure smells and can be used to raise up new life. Therefore, death may be necessary because of sin, and it may smell because of the sin it contains, but death itself is not the sin. Death therefore, not being sin, can precede it. In fact, it did.
Now, why did I dredge this up again? Because of what Paul wrote in Romans 5 & 6. I covered it in detail yesterday, in Romans 6 - From spiritual death to spiritual life! It would seem that what I derived from the facts, I could have simply derived by citing Paul.
I encourage to you read the post above, but the gist of Paul’s argument is that those under the law are guilty of sin for breaking the law. Those not under the law are not guilty of breaking any command, but they are still under sin, the evidence of which is the that death has continued to reign even in the lives of those with no command from God. But, while it is easy to see read this as physical death, it is also easy to see that those who are saved will still experience physical death.
So, people who are saved will still experience physical death, right? I mean, I will and you will (rapture possibilities notwithstanding), yet Paul also argues that accepting Christ means dying to our life under Adam, and hence escaping the consequences of Adam’s sin. Therefore, that consequence cannot possibly be physical death! Therefore, it wasn’t, and that explains why Adam did not physically die when he ate the apple. However, he did enter a sort of spiritual exile, a spiritual death. As God said, on the day Adam ate that apple, he died. Now, I am certain that Adam redeemed himself over time before he physically died, by repenting of his sin and living for God, as you and I have done and are doing.
So, here is the line of reasoning:
- Christ spares us from spiritual death
- Christ does not spare us from physical death
- Through Christ we are spared from the punishment of sin
- Therefore, spiritual death is our punishment for sin
- The death we are spared was passed down from Adam
- Therefore, Adam passes down spiritual death
- The death Adam passes down was a consequence for eating the apple
- Therefore, the consequence for eating the apple was spiritual death
- Therefore, physical death did not enter the world through Adam
- Therefore, evolution’s requirement for physical death does not contradict scripture