Introduction: Last week we looked at how the Biblical
concept of sin did not “fit” the theory of evolution. This
week we consider whether the results of sin – death – are
compatible with the theory of evolution.

Evolution says that tons of pre-human and animal life
shuffled on and off the planet before man ever arrived in
his present state. If that is true, then death was “old
news” by the time Eve ate the fruit. Let’s dive into the
Bible and see what it has to teach us on this subject!


    1. When you were a child, did you parents allow you
      to have a pet?

      1. What kind of animal was it?

    2. Do you know why they let you have an animal before
      the state allowed you to drive a car or vote?

    3. If you are a parent now, and you let your children
      have animals, why did you do that?

    4. If you, as an adult, have an animal, tell me why
      you have it?

    5. Let’s read Genesis 1:28 and 2:19. Did God give
      Adam and Eve animals? (He sure did!)

      1. Why?

      2. Why did he have Adam name the animals?

      3. What is mankind being told to do when (in
        Genesis 1:19) he is told to “rule” over the

    6. Would you say that God’s goals were similar to a
      parent’s goals in giving a child an animal? Let’s
      read Genesis 2:19 in context. Read Genesis 2:18-20.

      1. Why does God veer off the topic in v.19 and
        talk about making and naming animals? (God
        seems to say three things in this sequence.
        First, He seems to say that animals are our
        companions. But second, since none of them are
        “suitable helpers” He assigns them an inferior
        role as companions. The guy who said “Dog is
        man’s best friend,” missed Genesis 2:20. Our
        lesson suggests (Monday) a third reason for
        the animals: to teach us important lessons of
        “responsibility, interdependence and service.”
        This is reflected in our motivation to give
        our children animals.)


    1. If animals existed for millions of years before
      man emerged through evolution, would it be logical
      to conclude that we are caretakers for them?

      1. Does the theory of evolution undercut
        ecological and conservation arguments?

        1. If the evolutionary theory is “survival
          of the fittest” isn’t it appropriate to
          use animals in any way we want?

      2. Is the mere fact that animals “got here first”
        a reasonable basis for concluding under the
        evolutionary theory that we are not caretakers
        for the animals? (No. In that sense the
        Creation account and the evolutionary theory
        are the same. They both have animals arriving
        first. The difference is millions of years of

    2. What did animals eat under the Creation account?
      ( Genesis 1:30: vegetation. The idea that God
      originally created something other than the
      current predatory system is reinforced by Isaiah
      11:6-9, where we find lions eating vegetation like
      the ox.)

      1. What did animals eat under the theory of
        evolution? (Each other. The one who ate the
        most other animals won.)

        1. With this in mind, should all the PETA
          people logically be Creationists? (I
          would guess they are not because they do
          not know the Bible. The organization has
          a current ad campaign that says Jesus was
          a vegetarian. This is obvious nonsense
          based on Luke 24:40-43, the fact that He
          celebrated (and instituted!) the
          Passover. Even worse, of course, is
          Genesis 9:3.)

    3. When, according to the Bible, did death enter the
      animal kingdom?

      1. Read Genesis 3:6-7, 21. Man and God chose
        different garments. Why? (Man was entitled to
        eat vegetation and he chose his clothes from
        that. If God gave Adam and Eve garments from
        skin, the inference is that the “skin owner”
        was dead! Thus, the death of an animal
        directly followed from the first observable
        result of sin.)

      2. One of the attacks on the sanctuary system is
        the “barbaric” slaughter of so many animals.
        Is this God’s idea? Is this criticism of God
        justified? (The theory of evolution kills a
        lot more animals. The sanctuary service
        reinforces the idea that sin kills. Since sin
        was not God’s idea, it is improper to blame
        Him for this.)

    4. When sin entered, how did the relationship of man
      and animals change? (Prior to the entry of sin we
      have man benefitting animals. After the entry of
      sin, we have animals serving man to the point of
      giving up their life to be used as clothing. This
      concept culminated in God giving animals as food
      for man. ( Genesis 9:3))

    5. How interested is God in the welfare of animals?
      (Read Matthew 10:29 and Luke 12:24.)

      1. Is the theory of evolution contrary to the
        picture of God’s love for the animal creation
        that we see in the Bible?

    6. Let’s say that you work for a school textbook
      company. Your boss has just told you that you are
      to write a section on the origin of animal death.
      You are told you can write anything you want — as
      long as it makes man look good. What would you
      write? (Man has a natural bias towards the
      evolutionary theory. Under it, he has no
      responsibility for the death of the animals. It is
      only in the account of the Creation and the Fall
      that man takes direct responsibility for the death
      of the animals.)

    7. As we have seen, God specifically allowed man to
      use animals for clothing ( Genesis 3:21) and food
      ( Genesis 9:3). Does that mean it is “OK” to eat
      animals and wear fur coats or does it mean that
      when we do this we further impose the results of
      sin on animals? (At best, this seems to be a
      “timing” issue. However, when “timing” involves
      your own life, it becomes a very big issue!)


    1. Read Romans 8:19-21. We talked about this last
      week, but let’s touch on this again. Who is at
      fault for the suffering of the animals? Man or
      animals? (This says that animals were subjected to
      “frustration” by us.)

      1. What can animals do to get out of this
        situation? (Nothing. They can just hope.)

      2. What is the hope of the creation? (Jesus has
        freed us from the penalty of death. (Romans
        8:1-2) Romans 8 suggests that when man is
        rescued from this old world that the creation
        will also be freed from the burden of sin.)

    2. Friend, our sins have brought death and suffering
      to the animal kingdom. God originally gave us the
      responsibility to benevolently rule over the
      animals. What we have done to them as the result
      of our sins should only increase our concern for
      their welfare. However, only when the controversy
      between God and Satan is at an end, and God takes
      His people home, will the suffering of the
      creation end.