BTW there is absolutely no scientific reason or evidence to indicate that death was not a natural process for flora and fauna from the commencement of life on earth. "All" the evidence shows that non-human life was pretty as it is now with generation, reproduction and death as part of God's plan. The fossil record shows micro-organism for instance, that existed eons before man appeared. (Man appeared rather late on the scence). If bacteria, just to take one conclusive example, never died, at the rate at which they multiply, the world would very rapidly have been deluged...and then what?
Carnivorous and omnivorous animals, as we know from the fossil record, also existed long before Homo sapiens. What does one do next, arbitrarily deny any validity to palaeontology, archaeology and other related sciences just to maintain a questionable, personal interpretation of Scripture. Hence, it not from sound reasoning or science that one asserts that death was not a natural process, but the position is derived solely from a faulty interpretation of Scripture.
Ideas consistent with evolution were held by a number of early Christian writers such as St. Gregory of Nyssa and his school, and St. Augustine with the concept of "rationes seminales". St. Augustine stated the following:
"For it is one thing to form and direct the creature from the most profound and ultimate pole of causation, and He Who does this is alone the Creator, God; but it is quite another thing to apply some operation from without in proportion to the power and faculties assigned by Him, so that at this time or that, and in this way or that, the thing created may emerge. All these things, indeed, have originally and primarily already been created in a kind of web of the elements; but they make their appearance when they get the opportunity. For just as mothers are pregnant with their young, so the world is pregnant with things that are to come into being, things which are not created in it, except from the highest essence, where nothing either springs up or dies, has a beginning or an end."
St. Augustine also warned against interpreting the Bible in a way that contradicts what science and philosophy know to be true:
"We must also take heed, in handling the doctrine of Moses. That we altogether avoid saying positively and confidently anything which contradicts manifest experiences and the reasoning of philosophy or the other sciences. For since every truth is in agreement with all other truth, the truth of Holy Writ cannot be contrary to the solid reasons and experiences of human knowledge."
St. Augustine warned against the misuse of Scripture by those Christians in his day who lectured the naturalists on natural phenomena. His warning in the fourth century aptly applies to the current problem of denying what science knows to be fact. Accordingly, St. Augustine stated the following warning:
“It very often happens that there is some question as to the earth and the sky, or the other elements of this world—respecting which one who is not a Christian has knowledge derived from most certain reasoning or observation, and it is very disgraceful and mischievous and of all things to be carefully avoided, that a Christian speaking of such matters as being according to the Christian Scriptures, should be heard by an unbeliever talking such nonsense that the unbeliever perceiving him to be as wide from the mark as east is from west, can hardly restrain himself from laughing.
“And the real evil is not that a man is subjected to derision because of his error, but it is that to profane eyes, our authors (that is to say, the sacred authors) are regarded as having had such thoughts; and are also exposed to blame and scorn upon the score of ignorance, to the greatest possible misfortune of people whom we wish to save. For, in fine, these profane people happen upon a Christian busy making mistakes on the subject which they know perfectly; how, then, will they believe these holy books? How will they believe in the resurrection of the dead and in the hope of life eternal, and in the kingdom of heaven, when, according to an erroneous assumption, these books seem to them to have as their object those very things which they, the profane, know by direct experience or by calculation which admits of no doubt?
“It is impossible to say what vexation and sorrow prudent Christians meet with through these presumptuous and bold spirits who, taken to task one day for their silly and false opinion, and realizing themselves on the point of being convicted by men who are not obedient to the authority of our holy books, wish to defend their so thoughtless, so bold, and so manifestly false. For they then commence to bring forward as a proof precisely our holy books, or again they attribute to them from memory that which seems to support their opinion, and they quote numerous passages, understanding neither the texts they quote, nor the subject about which they are making statement.” http://presentconcerns.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html
It is not a correct use of terms to equate Darwinism with macroevolution in contrast to microevolution. In evolutionary biology macroevolution is used to refer to any evolutionary change at or above the level of species. Based on the content of the "Origin of the Species", the full title of the book is a misnomer. In regard to macroevolution at the species level, i.e. speciation, we can see conclusive evidence of that in the field. "Ring species" are a good example. If you are familiar with the concept, the European herring gull is living, visible proof of speciation. Evidence for macroevolution at the higher taxonomic levels is thin. Speciation is accepted even by some ID theorists such as Michael Denton, who of course can hardly be called a Darwinian.