Hugh Ross and others of the old-Earth creationist organization Reasons to Believe, who claim to have a literal interpretation of Genesis, believe that Adam and Eve were vegetarian before the Fall (Genesis 1:29), but that carnivorous animals of today were carnivorous then as well. They say that Genesis 1:30:

And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.

is stating that all of Earth's major ecosystems are based on green plant life, and is not saying that all animals were herbivores.

Is there any historical or linguistic precedent for this interpretation? In other words, did any Jewish or early Christian scholars interpret Genesis 1:30 as anything like this? If so, what linguistic subtleties do they point to that results in a carnivorous interpretation of 1:30, but a non-carnivorous interpretation of the preceding verse?


2 Answers 2


If you don't mind me referencing Rashi, a French Medieval rabbi, his understanding of Genesis 1:30 makes note that both humans and animals were on the same footing with regard to food.

Nothing is explicitly stated about how both humans and animals before the fall would otherwise acquire their nutrients, i.e., if humans were omnivores and if carnivores were carnivorous. After the flood, God permits humans to eat all living things, which includes meats. (Gen. 9:3)

It's worth noting in Genesis 4 that animal offerings were a thing and after the fall, Adam and Eve were given clothing from animals. In any case, whether or not carnivores were carnivorous is speculative as the text isn't explicit.

  • To add - John Chrysostom, Ephraim the Syrian, Basil the Great, and Ambrose of Milan were the most authoritative early Christian writers on Genesis and none of them take the position that the animals that were carnivores after the fall were also carnivores before. It wasn't just man that was the victim of his own fall - all creation fell with him (in the Orthodox Christian understanding, at least; cf. Romans 8:19,22).
    – guest37
    May 5, 2017 at 22:04
  • Thank you for the response, but could you clarify your use of the word "otherwise" in the second paragraph? May 7, 2017 at 16:24

The Hebrew in Genesis 9:3 does not mention meat, so we really should not use that verse to argue for an original totally vegetarian animal Kingdom before the Fall.

  • Welcome to Christianity.SE! and thank you for your contribution. When you get a chance, please take the tour to understand how the site works and how it is different than others. I would also recommend reading the Help Center's sections on asking and answering questions.
    – agarza
    Mar 20 at 2:50
  • Thanks for your answer. Although Genesis 9:3 doesn't use the word "meat" (or its Hebrew equivalent), it almost certainly refers to it. The ESV translation is "Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.". Mar 20 at 22:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .