Death through Sin

As I’ve been reading the blog and reflecting on Lewis’ perspectives, I am quite averse to the idea of pre-Fall animal carnivorousness. If animals were killing each other before humans even came into existence, this significantly changes what sin represents. Indeed, if death entered the world before sin, I think this brings into question the purpose for which purpose Christ’s death was necessary.

For these reasons and others, the second of the three points Lewis makes on animal pain is particularly problematic to me: “For one result of man’s fall was that his animality fell back from the humanity into which it had been taken up but which could no longer rule it” (139). Though I’ve frequently agreed with Lewis’ assessment of the problem of pain, I wholeheartedly disagree with him on this second point; here, ascribing to his view necessitates wholehearted acceptance of a macro-evolutionary process. As I mentioned above, this is not just a question of origins but of why Jesus had to die.

What am I even talking about here? Romans 5 states the situation in this way: “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned….For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in the life through the one man, Jesus Christ.” While animals are not mentioned, these verses speak of sin entering the world, a noun which suggests more than just humanity. Romans further indicates that the entire creation suffers because of Adam’s sin: “For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time” (Romans 8:20-22). Why would the entire creation be groaning and waiting for liberation unless the sin of Adam first brought upon it the curse of death as well? Also, if the creation had already been corrupted, why would God have cursed the earth after man’s fall?

As I’m writing this post, I am aware of the many legitimate questions and protests that could be raised against this view, but since there are reasons to believe and disbelieve any argument, please bear with me in this one. If we argue that death entered the world before sin – if even in the form of animal death and associated suffering – we are unraveling the reasons that Jesus had to die. If we tear apart those reasons, we are tearing apart the very foundation of our faith. The sacrifice of Christ was necessary, because nothing else could overcome the death that came into the world as a result of Adam’s sin.

Before I end, I would like to mention two tangential ideas that came to mind after reading others’ posts. First, in regard to Lewis’ idea of Satan corrupting creation, how much authority are we ascribing him by suggesting he was given corruptive power over an evolving creation when he fell? In this, I think Lewis asks far more questions than he is capable of answering.

Second, an item was raised a few posts below concerning God’s response to animal suffering. In class on Monday, Rascal said that he would be very angry if God allowed his mom’s friend to die of cancer but aided an animal in pain. While I completely understand the question in point, I don’t think that God’s decisions to intervene in the world require such an “either-or” choice or a decision process at all, because the actions of God emanate from Who He is. There is a never a conflict in the mind of God whether He should intervene in the life of a cancer patient or heal an injured dog. I think Lewis would agree with this. As he described in Chapter 2, “…Divine freedom cannot mean indeterminacy between alternatives and choice of one of them. Perfect goodness can never debate about the end to be attained, and perfect wisdom cannot debate about the means most suited to achieve it” (26). Though it is sometimes so painfully hard to understand why God works the way He does, I think we confine God by trying to transpose our human understanding of decision-making onto His. Amid all the things that we do not know of God and His world, however, I think we can know with certainty that His care for His creation is so intimate that not a sparrow falls to the ground without His knowing. How much greater His care must be for man, whom He formed in His image and gifted with the freedom of will!