I'm sympathetic to this view

[xero]

https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/animal-death-before-the-fall/

https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/did-death-of-any-kind-exist-before-the-fall/

I don't know one way or another, but if I were to ask, like I've asked HH's

"Would you LIKE to believe there's a creator who cares for YOU?"

...and I ask myself "Would you LIKE to believe the creator didn't allow death of any kind prior to the fall and that when he says in Revelation "...as the last ENEMY Death is to be done away with" and "he WILL wipe away EVERY tear and mourning and outcry AND PAIN" will be no more he meant the whole of creation including the animals?"

To the latter I'd have to say "YES!".

But I don't know. I'm defective, imperfect and my compass is likewise bent. Having said that, my compass and the Bible is all I have to go on (plus the Bible isn't a scientific work, nor does it include all things answered in detail).

Wasn't in the pub. "World Wide Security Under The Prince of Peace" where the WTBTS said "if we were invited to a party by someone we trusted we wouldn't demand that this person PROVE to us we'd enjoy ourselves before accepting the invitation"? (the idea being that asking for proof w/a skeptical critical spirit wouldn't be a good way to get along - certainly not w/our creator.) If not there, the sentiments have been expressed.

[Arauna]

Have you ever done an analyses of the main theme of the bible and follow the golden thread as it runs right throughout the bible?   I guarantee you,  one does not need to argue with anyone over evolution when you understand how consistent and realistic this theme is and how the continuity of it runs throughout every book if the bible.  Most of these prophets lived in different centuries and were not living at the same time or in the same place  to influence each other. One comes to the conclusion that the bible is " reality" - the bible is powerful in its consistency and Jehovah is all powerful in his logic and justice.

Humans have only scratched the surface of science and soon will have the whole world dying or suffering with their so-called outrageous science ideas which they will forcibly apply to mankind in their arrogance - NOT for the benefit of human kind but to our detriment.

Many themes are connected to the main theme of the bible.  One has no doubt that humankind will have  NO hope for a future if it was not for Jehovah's promises of the restoration of his original purpose. To understand all these issues are important to exercise faith. The wicked world in contrast provides enough evidence that humans cannot rule themselves successfully at all.

[Evacuated]

3 hours ago, xero said:

when he says in Revelation "...as the last ENEMY Death is to be done away with" and "he WILL wipe away EVERY tear and mourning and outcry AND PAIN" will be no more he meant the whole of creation including the animals?"

Many of Christendoms clergy seem to go with this view and probably not a few of Jehovah's Witnesses.

All I can say is that if in connection with animals "death is no more", then something else will have to be no more!!..........

[xero]

49 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

Many of Christendoms clergy seem to go with this view and probably not a few of Jehovah's Witnesses.

All I can say is that if in connection with animals "death is no more", then something else will have to be no more!!..........

I understand that we don't understand. On the other hand "is the hand of Jehovah too short?" Do we say "No problem Jehovah creating time and matter and the universe and all that is in it, but yeaaaaah....controlling it afterwards in a way that we don't understand? Yeaaaahhh I think if I can't explain it to my own satisfaction then it can't happen."

Wait! You don't understand how Jehovah created the space-time-matter continuum, but you accept that he did, but controlling the manner the creation can/will behave in the future must be amenable to your understanding at this moment?

I think we can agree that scriptures aren't forcing us into either position at the moment (animals dying vs not dying), but if I were VOTING (which it's not up to me) I'd RATHER puppies and kittens to not grow old and die. I also don't want to hammer a cow in the head or even euthanize it to eat it (although I do eat meat now, if I had to kill them myself, I think I'd figure out how to do it like mixing beans and rice and corn and other plants to get complete proteins.

We could also culture meat.

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

17 hours ago, xero said:

will be no more he meant the whole of creation including the animals?"

No. Animals would have died before Adam sinned. And animals didn't inhetit sin from Adam. 

Animals will stil die in the 'New world' 

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, xero said:

controlling the manner the creation can/will behave in the future must be amenable to your understanding at this moment?

Are you addressing these remarks generally or specifically?

Biofabrication. Hmm.... is that what Jehovah used here: Gen.3:21?

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, xero said:

puppies and kittens to not grow old and die.

Do you mean not grow up???

[xero]

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Do you mean not grow up???

Yeah that sounds weird. Like that movie where people stopped having children. (Children of Men - saw the trailer anyway) Only different. Anyway, no death, but it's like I said earlier (did I say this?). We have to anchor the big miracle - creation of the universe from nothing and understand that if we accept that (I do), the subsidiary miracles are not an issue. The questions would be "Why this one?". But instead of saying "If I can't understand why or how a miracle (isn't that what a miracle is?) occurs, I'm not even going to entertain it as a possibility." We'd leave it open.

[xero]

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Are you addressing these remarks generally or specifically?

Biofabrication. Hmm.... is that what Jehovah used here: Gen.3:21?

I hadn't thought about that. Scriptures don't say specifically - we connect the dots according to what we see and imagine what could be the next logical thing.

[Pudgy]

2 hours ago, xero said:

The questions would be "Why this one?". But instead of saying "If I can't understand why or how a miracle (isn't that what a miracle is?) occurs, I'm not even going to entertain it as a possibility." We'd leave it open.

A miracle is NOT a "miracle" because it comes from God.

It is a "miracle" because it ALMOST never happens, and when it does, we do not understand the mechanism of HOW it happened.

Example: If you as an archaeologist digging in the undisturbed volcanic pumice of Pompeii, uncovered a working modern day flashlight.

[xero]

48 minutes ago, Pudgy said:

A miracle is NOT a "miracle" because it comes from God.

It is a "miracle" because it ALMOST never happens, and when it does, we do not understand the mechanism of HOW it happened.

Example: If you as an archaeologist digging in the undisturbed volcanic pumice of Pompeii, uncovered a working modern day flashlight.

Good point. Of course I can just pick the definition from the Insight Book, which says pretty much the same thing. It speaks to the individual's viewpoint and capabilities. Posting this link, because the variants are amusing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws

[Pudgy]

... I respect a man who can quote Clarke's Three Laws, Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, and the names of the Three Stooges.

( actually, 4 Stooges ...)