I don't find where God breathed the breath of life into anything other than the first man which was the first life form.
This event only happened one time.
He does not say how He imparted life to anything else.
He did cause life forms to exist. Plants, animals, fowl and fish, but He does not give the details.
So you don't mind if I don't speculate do you?
Straggler writes:
OK. Don't speculate. Let's take the biblical account absolutely literally.
By this definition it would seem that man is the only form of life.
No?
If the bible does not say so then on what grounds do you conclude that bacteria, or indeed any other forms of life not specifically described as such in the bible, are actually alive?
All plants were made to grow out of the ground.
Every living creature was formed out of the ground.
If it is alive it was formed.
Straggler writes:
From a biblical point of view how do we determine what is alive and what is not?
ICANT writes:
The plants in Genesis 2:9 God made to grow out of the ground.
The beasts and fowls in Genesis 2:19 were formed from the ground.
There were no fish at this time.
There was no coral at this time.
Because there was no sea at this time.
I am referring to the time man was formed from the dust of the ground.
ICANT you are missing the point as usual.
If you define life in biblical terms then on what basis can you conclude that coral or bacteria are actually alive?
If you define life in biological terms then on what basis can you claim that God "breathed life" into anything?
ICANT writes:
God breathed into him the breath of life.
Life had to exist for God to transfer life to the man He had formed.
God is alive.
He has a Mind, Spirit and Body.
So no, God believing creationist do not have to accept that abiogenesis happened period.
So are bacteria alive?
On which basis, biblical or biological, do you conclude this answer?
™ Version 4.2
