35. Wouldn’t Eden have become overpopulated?

Back in Jr. High School, our math teacher used to ask if we’d rather have 1 million dollars, or the value of one penny after it’d been doubled every day for a month. The smart answer was the penny, because after 30 days it would grow to over 5 million dollars. But the point is this: numbers grow exponentially when doubled.

This exponential growth would also be seen in animals, had it not been for the perpetual cycle of death and predation that keeps their numbers under control. But this wasn’t always the case…

“…Scripture tells us that sin brought about animal death, something that did not occur prior to the Fall.”
~Bodie Hodge for Answers in Genesis

Many Christians believe that all the animals in Eden were vegetarians, and there was no death (because what God created was “good”). But God also made these animals to reproduce “after their own kind,” which presents a bit of a logistical problem.

If there were one of every species of animal (living or extinct) in Eden, there would be (conservatively) 10 million pairs of animals. If each healthy, adult pair had an average of just one offspring per year, there would be over 1 billion critters after just 12 years! And in 30 years, there would be over 13 trillion! And in 100 years, well… the planet would be overrun with animals!

In other words, Adam had to fail, or God would’ve had to bring reproduction to a halt in just a few years.

Defending my numbers

I acknowledge that: 1) this is a very rough estimate, 2) some animals would need a few years before they could reproduce, and 3) some may not reproduce every year. But after these animals did mature, they could potentially produce offspring indefinitely (presuming they remain in perfect health). Some animals also produce multiple offspring, and some reproduce several times per year. So I don’t think an average of one offspring per year per animal is unreasonable.

Even with death, disease, war, abortion, menopause and miscarriage, we humans are still able to grow our numbers exponentially (from a few million to 7 billion in 2,000 years). It’s also not uncommon to see mice, rats, rabbits, locusts, and other animals/insects overrun an environment when there is nothing there to stop them. In short, it’s not difficult to imagine that if animals never died, they would quickly fill up the earth.

So what would’ve happened if Adam never sinned?

If Adam never sinned, I can only imagine the scenario that might’ve unfolded in heaven…

Jesus: “What’s wrong God?”
God: “Oh, it’s my creation again, I may have made a minor error in my calculations. I put 20 million animals in the garden and now there are a trillion. I just don’t understand –”
Jesus: “A trillion! Holy crap!
God: “Yes, there’s a lot of crap, too. It’s getting so crowded down there that they can hardly move.”
Jesus: “So… what are you gonna do?”
God: “I dunno, but if mankind doesn’t sin soon, I may have to scrap this whole project. What would Jesus do?”
Jesus: “I would make a much larger planet.”
God: “Okay, well… what would Satan do?”
Jesus: “WWSD!? Why that ol’ snake would take full advantage of their ignorance and naivete! He would flat-out lie to them about the consequences of sin and they would totally trust him! It would be like lying to a baby!”
God: “BINGO!”
Jesus: “What!? You can’t be serious. You’re serious.”


At worst, the Garden of Eden story is illogical and absurd.

At best, God knew Adam was going to fail, and planned ahead by creating animals that could reproduce fast enough to stay one step ahead of extinction… well… except for all the animals that couldn’t reproduce fast enough to stay one step ahead of extinction.

This entry was posted in Intelligent Design?, Old Testament. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to 35. Wouldn’t Eden have become overpopulated?

  1. This is a good question to our brothers and sisters who advocate young earth creationism. But again biblical account can easily fit within current scientific knowledge of evolution.



    • Hello my holy nemesis,🙂

      That’s some pretty serious retrofitting. Let me see if I understand it correctly…

      After billions of years of evolution, along comes the Homo sapien, who is loved by God more than anything else that has yet to evolve (the dinosaurs weren’t worthy divinity). God congratulates one Homo sapien on his successful evolution by inserting a spirit and, presto, he becomes Homo divinus! The first Homo divinus, who I’ll call “Homo divinus Adamus,” immediately repays God by disobeying him and bringing about spiritual death for all mankind. (Jerk.) Adam understands he will NOT be dying physically or spiritually as God has said, but rather separating Himself from God, which is what God meant. And Adam fully understands these consequences because “It can… be argued that Adam must have been familiar with the reality of animal [and spiritual!!!] death, or he would not have understood Godʼs warning.” And yet… Adam screws himself anyway. Simple!

      But we eventually run into the same problem…

      “Although many human-like creatures lived and died before the Fall, these Homo sapiens did not yet bear the image of God. After the bestowal of Godʼs
      image, there was no death of Homo divinus until after the Fall.”

      “Part of their subsequent curse was that immortality was withheld, bringing both spiritual and physical death to humankind.”

      So the original premise still holds, at least with humans.

      If man never fell, and there was no death, then mankind would’ve multiplied exponentially and filled up the entire earth in a short time. If an immortal couple could only produce 10 offspring (even we post-fallen humans can do that), there would still be over 1.9 trillion people in just 17 generations…


      This raises some other interesting questions, like what would happen if just 1 of the 1.9 trillion decided to disobey god? Would it really be fair to bring about physical and spiritual death to the other 1,907,348,632,811 people? Just for one man’s sin? And if not, then is it really fair that 1 man should be able to condemn 7 billion?

      • Pan says:

        Your amusing that Eden was as earth is now, what if it was a realm to a different dimension? You are reasoning from what little you know about Eden from what the bible tells you or what you have heard others say, be more creative than that, we cannot comprehend Gods thoughts or the manner in which things where created. We simply grasp at straws and try to make sense of something incomprehensible. You are already trying to understand something that you do not believe is there, how is that sensible? Why are you questioning a God that you do not believe exits? Why are you not instead then questioning humanity? Why do people do the evil things they do? Because they believe there are no consequences for their actions? Why be evil at all? Why do people harm little children? Why do people create pollution? Why do people not find better and smarter ways of providing energy,fuel, food or other resources, I am pretty sure we have enough smart people to come up with better ways to better the world but we do not. Why is that? Maybe because of greed? Which is once again something we are warned against. Why do humans not listen to warnings? Why do we choose to do that which will bring harm to ourselves and others? If there is no Devil who tries to over throw God then what makes us do the evil things we do? Why do we only want to believe in God when we want something? Why can’t we be thankful for the little things he gives us everyday and praise him all the time and not just some of the time? If you truly believed in God you would not force your believe on others, your life will reflect that you believe in God and that would be an inspiration to others to want to believe in God and live a life that reflects God. What if God wanted to create humanity to see if they would choose right over wrong? What if there are an infinite number of possibilities for your future and amongst those are possibilities that you do make it to heaven or eternal life? What if God bought you into existence hoping that you would choose Him and choose the right path because there was the possibility of you doing that? But you kept on ignoring His call and doomed yourself to damnation? We amuse because God is all knowing that there is only one possibility for our future, an all knowing God would not only know about one future. He would know all your infinity possible futures. It is up to you to choose Him, it’s as simple as that.

  2. Well I’m a lousy nemesis because I can’t hate you for asking questions😉

    You have to bear in mind that this is just another theory among many. But let’s play with it a little.

    So assume that there was once a paradise in middle east or africa that was of limited scope. There God created Adam and Eve (assuming they where historical figures) and gave them His spirit. Because Adam and Eve fell short, they got expelled and gave the whole humanity (at that time in the level of animals) their inheritance. This included the knowledge of good AND evil. The ability to chose.

    This is the very intention of or Creator. But He meant us to choose good instead of the evil. Those 1,907,348,632,811 have the very same possibility to choose good instead of the evil.

    Was this originally planned like this by God or did He meant us all to be good? I dunno🙂

    But this is of course theory. No science nor theology can give us a full theory without gaps when it comes to the very early days of the humanity. But however you interpret your Genesis the result is the same. Man falls short of the standards set by our creator and need to come to relationship with Him in order to be saved. Better to take stuff that we know for certain the original authors meant when they wrote the Genesis. Theories is just theories.

    Hope this helps

  3. rautakyy says:

    The story of Eden is an obvious fairy tale. Problems as the one you suggest only arise, when someone tries to explain a fairytale as reality. The real lesson here is that since the entire story is so unplausible and unrealistic that it can only be excused as such a total metaphor that it no longer has any bearing in real life, what is it a metaphor of and why is the metaphor transforming according to what humanity has learned about science? It seems to me, that BSH is trying to answer the question of what the metaphor might mean, while the original question of “Would’nt Eden Have Become Overpopulated”, was more on the lines of why does the story not make any sense. Or to be more precise, why is the Bible set to appeal only to the ignorant, or the culturally indoctrinated, or the gollible?

    Once a very big group of people thought that the Bible gave them exact and realistic description of the world and how it came to be. A very big part of humanity still does. Why? Because of religious propaganda having effect mostly on the ignorant. Today more and more of those stories are removed from the rank of actual descriptions of events, matters and the structure of the universe. They are transferred into the class of metaphors. This causes a tremendous impact on the credibility on any of the supernatural explanations. In fact, it is devastating. It of course causes a nuber of funny conclusios, like that deities and demons have become less frequent in appearing in the world and that they are replaced by all sorts U.F.O:s and such.

    Such logical fallacies in religious stories as described in the blog post, tell us that they are propably not efforts to contact humanity (honestly, quite lacking at that) by some higher being, but the products of primitive and ignorant human cultures. Just as is common among human cultures and religions. However, primitive does not mean stupid. The early human cultures we are talking about were formed by of the very same kind of human beings as we are today. There is no reason why a supreme creator of the universe, or even a lesser god could not have given humans accurate information about the universe or the origin of life. The only difference between accurate information, that science has and is yet revealing to us on these matters, and the alledgedly metaphorical stories about paradise and how the earth was supposedly created before the sun, is that the bronze age cultures could not have invented the accurate information. But what they were perfectly capable to invent, was the Biblical and other anthropological story versions, that could of course all as well be explained rather as a metaphor of what we now know really happened.

    The question why the young earth creationists believe the Bible to be accurate is not to be poised on them. Their motives are clear on this. They are affraid of losing their faith (and salvation), if they give away to the fact that the Bible is not a very reliable source for anything supernatural. Perhaps it would be more interresting to ask their god, why did that divinity and alledged creator of the universe decide to delude these people into false beliefs? Why is it that this god of theirs decided to tease them and test their faith by making it more and more unplausible suggestion? Especially since this same god also set the game so that if they as a result of healthy skepticism end up separated from the god they so much loved in their early lives? But no god answers any questions. Why? Because god decides to remain silent, or because they simply do not exist? If the reason is the former, then why is that? Are gods not being assholes in this matter towards humanity, agnostics, atheists, creationists and other religious folk alike?

    • “There is no reason why a supreme creator of the universe, or even a lesser god could not have given humans accurate information about the universe or the origin of life. The only difference … is that the bronze age cultures could not have invented the accurate information.”

      Exactly! This is what I was saying back in question #14 (Why is God ignorant of His own creation?). There is absolutely no reason why God couldn’t reveal some intimate details about His creation, which would have certified Him, and the Bible, as authoritative and reliable. Such revelations would’ve been impossible for bronze age man. But anyone can make up a creation story, and when that story fails to match the facts, downgrade it to a fraking metaphor and claim it still has some validity… even if that truth isn’t exactly known (or will ever be known). It certainly doesn’t inspire much confidence in the story, not as much as verifiable facts would.

      “Perhaps it would be more interresting to ask their god, why did that divinity and alledged creator of the universe decide to delude these people into false beliefs?”

      I’m starting to see this problem more and more. God makes the world appear one way, then tells us to ignore it and believe another away. For example, why give us a genealogy in His “inspired” book that says the Universe is roughly 6,000 to 10,000 years old, and then give us light from stars and galaxies that clearly would’ve taken more than 10,000 years to get here? Then tell us to ignore the wisdom of this world and continue to trust His version of the story!?

      Similarly, the story of Adam and Eve contains numerous logical flaws. We can either: 1) believe it despite those flaws, 2) manipulate it into 1000 sensible-sounding metaphors, or 3) admit it was made up like all other ancient creation stories.

      • Franky says:

        Clowns! Read the book cover to cover and then discuss biblical issues. There is no issue at all…just read the details in genesis and don’t interpret things that are not there…and check when exactly everything started multiplying. There is no word about exponential growth every year…Maybe Adam and Eve had a hand full kids after almost a millennia of life..? Who said animals multiply endlessly since creation, maybe it happened after God changed everything after sin. There are a lot of unknown ‘maybe’ assumptions in those calculations – just like those assumption based scientific ‘explanations’ that throw up more questions than answers and they (scientists) seem to change their mind every decade or so. Takes more faith to believe the Big Bang than it does to believe in God. Just don’t make up theoretical models about genesis that are not in there

        • Hi Franky,

          “…check when exactly everything started multiplying”

          I checked. Day 5.

          “Who said animals multiply endlessly since creation”

          Um… God? Or whomever authored Genesis. Genesis 1:20-22 says,

          And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures… God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas…” And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

          Since God orders sea creatures to multiply and fill the sea, we know they were reproducing. He then orders the same for land animals in verse 24-25, and finally for humans starting in verse 26…

          Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image… God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth…”

          So not only were man and animals multiplying, it was happening at a rate that God deemed sufficient enough to “fill the earth.” At which point, they would’ve had to stop multiplying because the earth was filled, which would’ve been very quickly at known rates of reproduction.

          I’m assuming this rate has not changed. Why? Perhaps you should follow your own advice, and “read the details in genesis and don’t interpret things that are not there.” Unless Genesis says the rate changed, I don’t think you should assume it has.

      • Jeff says:

        One of the biggest delusions, as I see it, is the delusion the OT god gave to the Jews about the identity of the messiah, if the Christian version of the messiah is true, as 100% of Christians believe. Christ did not fulfill the OT description given to the Jews. On the other hand, if the OT god did not deceive the Jews, then the NT version of the identity of the messiah is false. OR, they are not the same god, which means there are 2 supreme beings. OR …..I know you get the point, as do I.

      • Pan says:

        Shoe, please read the bible if not to want believe in it but to get your facts straight. The bible is filled with scientific facts.

        Here are a few just to mention below: and here is the link http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html

        The earth free-floats in space (Job 26:7), affected only by gravity. While other sources declared the earth sat on the back of an elephant or turtle, or was held up by Atlas, the Bible alone states what we now know to be true – “He hangs the earth on nothing.”

        Modern Science In An Ancient (ICR)

        Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.

        All About Atoms (Jefferson Lab)

        The Bible specifies the perfect dimensions for a stable water vessel (Genesis 6:15). Ship builders today are well aware that the ideal dimension for ship stability is a length six times that of the width. Keep in mind, God told Noah the ideal dimensions for the ark 4,500 years ago.

        The Ark’s perfect dimensions (Answers In Genesis)
        Safety investigation of Noah’s Ark in a seaway (Answers In Genesis)
        Noah’s Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic (Answers In Genesis)

        When dealing with disease, clothes and body should be washed under running water (Leviticus 15:13). For centuries people naively washed in standing water. Today we recognize the need to wash away germs with fresh water.

        -Why do I need to wash my hands?

        Sanitation industry birthed (Deuteronomy 23:12-13). Some 3,500 years ago God commanded His people to have a place outside the camp where they could relieve themselves. They were to each carry a shovel so that they could dig a hole (latrine) and cover their waste. Up until World War I, more soldiers died from disease than war because they did not isolate human waste.

        The First Book Of Public Hygiene (Answers In Genesis)
        Modern medicine? (Answers In Genesis)

        Oceans contain springs (Job 38:16). The ocean is very deep. Almost all the ocean floor is in total darkness and the pressure there is enormous. It would have been impossible for Job to have explored the “springs of the sea.” Until recently, it was thought that oceans were fed only by rivers and rain. Yet in the 1970s, with the help of deep diving research submarines that were constructed to withstand 6,000 pounds-per-square-inch pressure, oceanographers discovered springs on the ocean floors!

        Springs of the Ocean (ICR)
        There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea.

        Numerical Simulations Of Precipitation Induced By Hot Mid-Ocean Ridges (ICR)

        Joy and gladness understood (Acts 14:17). Evolution cannot explain emotions. Matter and energy do not feel. Scripture explains that God places gladness in our hearts (Psalm 4:7), and ultimate joy is found only in our Creator’s presence – “in Your presence is fullness of joy” (Psalm 16:11).

        Blood is the source of life and health (Leviticus 17:11; 14). Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled” and many died as a result (e.g. George Washington). Today we know that healthy blood is necessary to bring life-giving nutrients to every cell in the body. God declared that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” long before science understood its function.

        Life in the Blood (ICR)

        The Bible states that God created life according to kinds (Genesis 1:24). The fact that God distinguishes kinds, agrees with what scientists observe – namely that there are horizontal genetic boundaries beyond which life cannot vary. Life produces after its own kind. Dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats, roses produce roses. Never have we witnessed one kind changing into another kind as evolution supposes. There are truly natural limits to biological change.

        Things You May Not Know About Evolution (ICR)
        Creation – Evolution (ICR)
        Evolution and the Bible (ICR)
        The Fossil Record: Intermediate Links (ChristianAnswers.net)
        Archaeopteryx A Feathered Reptile? (ChristianAnswers.net)
        The Ape-Man: Missing Link (ChristianAnswers.net)
        Biological Evolution Darwin’s Finches (ChristianAnswers.net)

        Please for goodness sake at least do proper research.

  4. Ryan Groene says:

    I think that all of this is based on a false assumption, and that is that human beings (and animals) would live indefinitely ON EARTH before the fall. As for animals, the Genesis account NEVER says that animals did not die before the fall. It only says that animals did not prey on other animals. As for human beings, death as we know it today did not begin until man lost access to the Tree of Life, which symbolizes the Life that is in God’s presence (the idea being that when man is alienated from God, he becomes alienated from the source of life). However, it is still very possible that, in the absence of sin, man would have simply been taken from the earth after a certain period of time to be with God. Physical death, as we know it now, is a curse because it goes hand-in-hand with spiritual death. It involves pain and suffering, and it is a perversion of the natural order. Finally, the Bible says that on the new earth, there is no procreation at all (at least, not for humans). Perhaps it was always eventually God’s will to transform the present creation into an even more glorious one, on which all the humans who had ever lived would dwell for eternity (obviously it would have to grow in size significantly).

    There is also another possible explanation. It is that God already KNEW that man would sin in advance. If He did, why would He need to plan for a problem that He knew would never come to pass. Of course, I still believe that this would indicate an inherent perfection in God’s original design, so I don’t go with this explanation.

    Finally, what’s to say that God did not simply change how things worked after the fall? Given what I said before about animal death occurring naturally, maybe animals had shorter life spans, and maybe human beings were only ever meant to procreate to the point that they filled the earth, and then the transformation would occur. We also shouldn’t make assumptions about what percentage of the time man would actually give birth or how fast the filling of the earth would actually occur. Again, there is no reason to assume that things worked the same way before the fall as they did after. You said in one comment that there is no reason to think that something changed unless the text said so. But why would that be? Believing that the Bible is accurate doesn’t mean that it gives exhaustive information about what happened.

    Oh, and for the record, I am NOT a young earth creationist. I do believe that the earth is billions of years old, but that humans (made in God’s image) are only about 6,000 years old (though there were primates living before then who may have had some rudimentary ability to make things).

    • Hi Ryan,

      Genesis doesn’t plainly state that there was no death in Eden, but it is commonly assumed by creationists. The Creationist website AnswersinGenesis.org puts it this way…

      “In the beginning, about 6,000 years ago, God created the universe and everything in it in six actual days. At the end of His creative acts on the sixth day, God ‘saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good’ (Genesis 1:31). To have been very good, God’s creation must have been without blemish, defect, disease, suffering, or death… in God’s very good creation, animals did not eat each other (and thus, there was no animal death).”

      ChristianAnswers.net says likewise…

      “The world before the Fall had no death, disease, or suffering, as God proclaimed the finished creation “very good”… Clearly, there was no disease, suffering, or death of animals… before the Fall.”

      So I’m just going by the common creationist interpretation, but I realize that there are many other possible interpretations (and I can’t possibly cover them all).

      Even if we go ahead and assume that God retooled reproduction rates after the fall, God apparently didn’t do a very good job of it, considering the overwhelming majority of animals have since gone extinct. God even went through a lot of trouble to save them by putting two of all animals on the ark (again, according to creationists). So what shall we then conclude? That God created these animals, cared enough to retool them after the fall, and save them upon the ark, only to then let them die?

    • Jeff says:

      Actually, maybe this part of your post is wrong, “Finally, the Bible says that on the new earth, there is no procreation at all (at least, not for humans).

      In talking about the new earth: Rev 22:15 says “But outside the city are the perverts and those who practice magic, the immoral and the murderers, those who worship idols and those who are liars both in words and deeds.”

      This seems to indicate normal human activities (such as procreation) will continue, outside the gates, on the new earth. Hmmm……..

      • Jeff says:

        That last post about procreation on the new earth was for Ryan. I can’t seem to get the gist of having the replies show up in the right place.

  5. fluffyCat says:

    500 Q’s,
    Been looking through your different question posts and I believe you mentioned you are not closed-minded but willing to look at all sides and also been to other websites seeking explanations. Don’t know if you have explored this one:
    Don’t know if this would be helpful or meaningful to you. Peace – FluffyCat

    Question from Seenoevo: “Apart from the ups and downs of academic/technical discussions of this subject, how does belief or non-belief in a literal-Genesis 1 creation affect the secular aspects of one’s daily life? How does it affect the religious aspects of one’s life, including one’s growth in holiness?”
    Mike Beidler – #74473 November 17th 2012

    “Excellent questions, Seenoevo!
    For me, the transition from a woodenly literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11 to one that respects a literary reading of those chapters and helped me to understanding the principle of accommodation, i.e., God meets us where we are and is willing to speak theological truth to us through means that are not completely foreign to us but rather through genres with which we are familiar. This includes utilizing scientifically inaccurate paradigms. I do not view this as God “lying” to the reader, but speaking truth to the reader. Who, when their 3-year-old child asks where babies come from, launches into a detailed discussion about the act of sex, reproductive organs, eggs, sperm, birth canals, etc.? None of which I’m aware. Instead, we accommodate the truth in ways that our 3-year-old understands. Once the truth is revealed at a later age, I would find it hard to believe that our children would accuse us of lying to them in previous iterations of the “birds and the bees” discussion. (Of course, Santa’s a whole ‘nother ball game.)

    This principle of accommodation has allowed me to view the Scripture in an entirely new light. It has forced me to focus my faith not on the sacred Scriptures but on the One to Whom the Scriptures point! My faith has become so much more Christ-focused. My energies have become less directed toward proving Scripture true and more toward proving the Living Christ to be true by means of my words and actions.

    As for the “secular aspects” of my daily life, you’d be surprised how much evolutionary theory undergirds those archetypal truths that Genesis 2-3 teaches about the universal sinfulness of mankind. (More on this in Part 3.) To this end, I actually find evolutionary biology to be a more powerful tool than the Scriptures.”

    • rautakyy says:

      @FluffyCat, I think you have a point here, but beg to disagree. We are not talking about 3 year old children here, but alledgedly the creator of the entire universe telling all of mankind how it is. Or are you suggesting, that the ancient Hebrews and the modern day Creationists are at the same emotional and rational level as 3 year olds?

      I see no reason why such an entity would have explained the universe in incorrect terms to any of those people. The analogy about the three year old kid is kind of moot, but I indulge it for a bit longer. If a three year old asks where do babies come from, it is more honest and ethical, to tell the kid that they come from the mommys tummy, than to tell her/him, that a storch brings them. The storch story is not only more deceitfull, but it might actually be more harmfull, if you never correct that incorrect information the three year old might become pregnant just about ten years later. And as you know such things happen. But the Biblical stories are at the very least as far removed from reality as the storch version. And furthermore, they are allready being very harmfull in the sense, that even schoolsystems have been contested from teaching the scientific knowledge about evolution, because it contradicts these silly ancient stories.

      The ancient people were not different from us in their emotional and rational capabilities. They just simply had achieved less information, wich is manifest not only in the Bible, but a shit load of other sources from antiquity. However, the ancient Chinese, Persian, Greek and Egyptian scientists are an obvious proof of the fact, that the people of antiquity were fully capable of not only accepting, but also of achieving very high levels of scientific information. Perhaps the creator entity should have chosen Greeks, and not the Hebrews, to co-author a book with any coherent information in it… :p

  6. Donald says:

    I appreciate your dilemma. How is this possible without overpopulating the world. I would suggest the following:
    1. The earth and its inhabitant were created perfect. IT was the image of a perfect creator.
    2. Sex was not a sin, but part of the perfect plan. There was never meant to be adultery, fornication, and other forms of sexual sin. I don’t mean to imply that it didn’t feel good, I simply mean to say, before sin, sex was perfect not perverse. IT would have been used appropriately.
    3. Reproduction would have been natural and as you pointed our it would have proliferated rather quickly.
    4. Man would choose to be a good steward of the perfect world he was given because he too was perfect and could only do what God commanded him. This is evident in Jesus who was perfect doing only what the Father commanded. In doing what the Father commanded, man would have considered the size of the earth, the environment, sustainability etc and treated it with respect. Something we could take a lesson from today. Our image today is tear down, destroy, use recklessly, greed, self interest etc. These ideals are all destructive to the environment. In other words, man didn’t have sex just to please himself and he could stop because he knew it was good and right. Man today, is faced with over population. If we cold control ourselves and stop pleasing ourselves, this would not be a problem. Perhaps God knew this in Eden and His perfect creation would have stopped.
    5. The Bible says “fill the earth and subdue it.” IT also says “Let the land produce living creatures of its kind.” It never says how much. Perhaps it is worth considering that the same God who says “begin” could also say, “rest, it is good.”
    7. Your numbers about reproduction are based on the examples from the “fallen world.” Adam lived 930 years rather than 90 years. We cant be sure if he had 3 or 300 kids in 930 years. Perhaps they had a few or a lot of kids in those 100’s of years. But we also have to consider that God is the one who brings the increase to the woman. It is by God’s sovereignty that a woman is made pregnant. It could also be true that God’s design was to limit childbearing so that animals and men could only reproduce at a rate that would fulfill the timetable that God had in mind.
    6. One day the earth will come to an end and at the “name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess Jesus is Lord.” And Jesus will come again to judge the living and the dead. Had everything gone perfect, then perhaps the world would have ended, or reached its fullness long ago instead of 6000 plus years later.

    It is equally interesting to me that the world seems to scientifically and theologically hand in the balance of two plans for creation. One of God and one of chance. The evolutionists call God a hoax and his plan improbable. But He is God and He can do anything. But the same evolutionists will not for a moment consider the absurdity of an evolution that is by chance and leads to higher beings. No evidence supports this theory of evolving, it is a mere observation that is a “theory.” Further no evidence supports any sort of evolving in our life, missing links are absent, no transitional species exist to support an evolved creature. Our DNA is not evolving but it is clearly de-evolving as we become more prone to sickness, allergies, and many other provable and observable facts regarding the de-evolution of man.

    It makes sense to question creation and evolution. Creationists believe in God and do so by faith but is faith a logical response in science? I have faith that this is right. shouldn’t science be empirical? While both may be theories in the eyes of both camps, why would you not share both theories especially if you have no concern for the provability of theology? Shouldn’t it be the free will of a people to choose which they believe? Why do atheists and scientist work so hard to suppress the rights of others to conform to their “higher” thinking but call religionists ignorant and superstitious and claim that these same people use religion to suppress real science? Seems contradictory. I am not afraid of what science will prove. I want a world of science as well. It has been a blessing in many ways and from my standpoint, will ultimately point to God.

    Perhaps it is this wisdom of science, which we pursue so hard that is reminiscent of the tree of knowledge that led to the fall in the first place?

  7. There’s actually a humorous cartoon on the subject by Youtuber DarkMatter2525. ‘If Man Obeyed God’ (just a warning to more sensitive viewers that it does contain some adult language):

  8. Giraffe lover says:

    In Genesis, God tells us to fill the earth and subdue it. Hear that? Fill the earth. When the earth was full, I think God would have said ‘ok creation. That’s good. You don’t have to multiply anymore since the earth is full’ well, of course I don’t believe He would have said it EXACTLY like that but you get the point. This is just my idea of what might have happened. Fill the earth and subdue it. It’s full so all that is left is to subdue.😃 that’s what might have happened if we hadn’t of sinned. I dunno. I’ll just have to ask God some day.

Leave a reply (but please keep it related to the topic)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s