God and Sin

[miknik5]

THE TESTIMONY of JESUS is THE SPIRIT of PROPHECY...

Anything other than the TESTIMONY of JESUS, is a lie and the work of satan...

Whether one knowingly or unknowingly is aware of that...

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Because I don´t lie.

I am not saying you are lying. I know you believe the things you post. But I am not going to believe these things are true without good evidence which you don't provide. You just keep posting what you believe.

I believe Big Foot exists, I don't lie, do you believe Big Foot exists?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

because it is all there written over thousands of years...and because all that is written were simply the shadows of what was to come and all that would be fulfilled in CHRIST

GOD provided sign upon sign and pictures and shadows and symbols and pieces of the puzzle throughout HIS written word so that we would look back and bring to mind that ALL along HE spoke and pointed us to HIS SON.

I am not convinced. These are just claims not evidence.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

There is no evidence provided by other religious claims, sir...all it is is a lower imitation and distortion of THE TRUTH...

Another claim without evidence.

There is only ONE GOD...and ONE TRUTH...
I told you, many profess to have god(s) but deny THE SON.
GOD in HIS WISDOM, by sending HIS SON, not only provided the ONLY WAY and the ONLY TRUTH...but shut up the mouths of every lying, deceiving spirit who whispers and mutters a lower imitation and distortion of THE TRUTH.

It has been the work of satan from the beginning and his lying words continue even to this day:

¨Did GOD reallllyyyyyyy say?¨


Yes, GOD really did say.

More claims.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Myths were simply the work of satan...who taught superstitious men how to practice divination. How to delve into spiritual realms

But rather than providing THE TRUTH, satan twisted and distorted and offered portions of the truth so as to sow in seeds of confusion and doubt

You look at these other religions and myths and you think they are truth(s)?

GOD is before all things and HIS TRUTH is from the beginning...



satan also knew the truth.
but satan is a liar and a deceiver.


There is only ONE TRUTH...and that TRUTH will remain THE TRUTH regardless of those who believe it or do not believe it.

Truth should be able to be known without faith. These are more claims.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Isaiah 8

Bind up the testimony, seal the instruction among My disciples.’ 17And I will wait for the LORD, that hideth His face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for Him. 18Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me shall be for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, who dwelleth in mount Zion. 19And when they shall say unto you: ‘Seek unto the ghosts and the familiar spirits, that chirp and that mutter; should not a people seek unto their God? on behalf of the living unto the dead 20for instruction and for testimony?’—Surely they will speak according to this word, wherein there is no light.— 21And they shall pass this way that are sore bestead and hungry; and it shall come to pass that, when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse by their king and by their God, and, whether they turn their faces upward, 22or look unto the earth, behold distress and darkness, the gloom of anguish, and outspread thick darkness.

Nice God you have there.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

What this means is that there is only ONE TESTIMONY...and those who do not speak according to THE WORD...it is because there is no light in them (of the knowledge of THAT ONE TESTIMONY)...

The TESTIMONY is bound up amongst HIS DISCIPLES...yet to those who testify to this TRUTH as HIS WITNESSES, some do not believe...

And rather than going and continuing to go to the ONE TRUE GOD, they seek and do not even realize that they are seeking the spirits of the dead....and those are them that belong to another father, sir..

And NOT GOD, who is THE ONE AND ONLY GOOD....I repeat and emphasize GOOD FATHER...

More claims.

Even if the children think they know better than their FATHER....they do not fully understand that their FATHER knew what was best for them and did what was best for them.

Whose fault is this? If God made us inferior and incapable to understand him and he refuses to explain it to us. How is this our fault, it is His if he exists.

If only the children would wake up and realize, though they may be full grown, their FATHER in HEAVEN knows best and they should leave it at that and TRUST IN HIM and HIM alone....

Why should I when He commands immoral acts without explaining them. You would not support anyone that supports slavery today but you follow a God by faith that did.

 

[cvanwey]

You raise several interesting points but let's start with this important issue, which you've repeated several times .

Gen 2:16-17 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

There is a clear command here to _not_ eat of that tree and a clear explanation of the results of breaking that command. So, Adam clearly knew that eating of that tree would be a transgression and knew the consequences of that transgression.

Similarly, your one-year-old girl is certainly accountable for her transgression. Her mother wouldn't be a good mother if she hid all the forks away. She needed to teach her to _not_ put the metal fork in the electrical socket. It would be pointless to hide all the forks bec the child could find another metal object and put it in the socket. We cannot grow up into responsible adults if we're protected from LIFE.

The result of transgression is death. Think of this not as an arbitrary judgment but as a law of physics. Something like the Hindu karma. But God, in His mercy, did not leave us to pay for karma that we could never pay for bec of the continuous transgressions of mankind.

If this frame of thought is OK with you, we can proceed to your other points. Otherwise, we can discuss this further.

2 issues:

1. As stated prior, to another, if one does not yet have the knowledge of 'good' or 'bad' (or) 'right' and 'wrong', then Adam would have no reason to necessarily listen

2. If God a) has perfect foreknowledge, and also, b) truly wanted Adam not to eat of this tree; as the consequence would soil all future 'creation' entirely, then don't allow access to the tree for which He already knows will be violated.

 

[cvanwey]

Ok. There lies the problem...you...YOU...don´t believe that GOD is GOOD...and as a father did what is best for HIS CHILDREN...

Morals are subjective. Maybe {you} think a God whom issues dictates about homosexuality being 'bad', men are above women, and slavery being a-okay, (all just for starters), is 'good'. I don't agree.

If we disagree, how might we settle such matters? Hence, if you wish to delve into the Euthephro dilemma, we most certainly can.

But I truly doubt you will do anything else, verses what you have done thus far. Which is blank assertions, and a large dose of preaching.

 

[cvanwey]

If you read my response as an analogy to a very nuanced topic, you may understand what I was getting at.

Furthermore, God is not limited to materialism--but for the sake of creating a functioning world/universe, I'm sure he would work by his own set guidelines to keep things tidy.

I got what you stated prior, in post #209. You are stating agents need contrast. However, as I eluded to prior, before humans, and in heaven, such 'contrast' will likely not be necessary. And again, God can create any set of rules He wishes. Hence, to 'require' sin was God's choice, in His play book; and no one else.

This concept would be a lot easier understood if people separated 'free will' from 'free will without any consequences'.

In light of your response, I'll re-ask my questions:

1. What is the necessary definition for 'free will' here, and why? -- (Since there could be more than one description)...
2. How does 'free will' work in heaven?
3. Does 'free will' apply to God?

Spoiler alert: your examples fail to back up your point and making a statement does not make it a fact.

See below...

As much as I enjoy the concepts discussed in philosophy, this is a prime example of needlessly complicating things to the point where NOTHING makes sense. It does not need to be as complicated as you've described, and I will point out the errors here;

I can hardly wait

If being good is an unchanging part of his character and he is unable to act outside of that, then no; he cannot simply 'change his mind'. That would be like me suddenly deciding that I'm going to turn into a biological dog instead of a human.

Your asserted God changes His mind though. Hence, I guess there exists no need to investigate [your] proclaimed God any further here.

"14 So the Lord changed his mind about the terrible disaster he had threatened to bring on his people"

"3 So the Lord changed His mind about this. “It will not be,” said the Lord."

"13 Now therefore amend your ways and your deeds and obey the voice of the Lord your God; and the Lord will change His mind about the misfortune which He has pronounced against you."

This would imply that there are other dictates to be followed; there are not.

Why must a dictate be followed?

Furthermore, if the reason is anything outside, "because I say so", then you immediately concede the lack of a need for a God. And if the reason is because He says so, then it is demonstrated -> "might makes right".

Furthermore, if the human moral compass is flawed, then how are we to know to follow God's command?

Why is the sky blue, because we just started calling it that?

Calling the sky 'blue'(something subjective, as there are words besides blue to describe the sky)is simply describing a pre-existing observable fact. The word 'blue' is not absolute, but what we are describing is. Therefor, you could argue that calling the sky blue is subjective, since another person could easily call it something else. But what they can't do is change the sky's color, which is something any living things with eyes(that are not colorblind)can observe.

The same principles apply to God. God isn't 'good' because he says so--calling him 'good' is describing the unchanging character trait God possesses that we commonly associate with goodness.

This entire point relies on the possibility of something outside of God dictating morality; which there, in this scenario, is not. Therefor, it doesn't matter if God's 'good' matches our subjective ideas of the concept.

Not only did you re-purpose option one, but you just produced a blank assertion that such a God must necessarily exist.

I'll give you a chance to place your money where your mouth is...

Name for me an "objective/absolute moral value"? Then please also prove it?

 

[Andrewn]

2 issues: 1. As stated prior, to another, if one does not yet have the knowledge of 'good' or 'bad' (or) 'right' and 'wrong', then Adam would have no reason to necessarily listen

As I mentioned, God gave Adam a clear command / advice and told him explicitly what would happen if he ate from the tree. So, _before_ eating from the tree Adam already knew that eating would be evil. The TKGE did not impart that knowledge. This is opposite to your 1st assumption.

The phrase in Hebrew: טוֹב וָרָע, tov wa-raʿ, literally translates as good and evil, is an example of the type of figure of speech known as merism, a literary device that pairs opposite terms together in order to create a general meaning, so that the phrase "good and evil" simply implies "everything." This is seen in the Egyptian expression evil-good, which is normally employed to mean "everything." In Greek literature, Homer also uses the device when he lets Telemachus say, "I [wish to] know everything, the good and the evil." (Odyssey 20:309–310)

TKGE is to be understood to mean a tree whose fruit imparts knowledge of everything, this phrase does not denote a moral concept. God created the tree because the tree would impart useful knowledge. But God wanted to test Adam's love and obedience to Himself. Instead, Adam chose to obey Satan.

2. If God a) has perfect foreknowledge, and also, b) truly wanted Adam not to eat of this tree; as the consequence would soil all future 'creation' entirely, then don't allow access to the tree for which He already knows will be violated.

God never lets his perfect foreknowledge interfere with humans' free will and experience. He created the TKGE bec He _wanted_ Adam to eat of this tree at the right time, when He would allow Adam. This is opposite to your 2nd assumption.

God's created humans to enjoy immortality with Him and God's plan cannot be "soiled." The incarnation was not an "afterthought!" It was planned from the beginning. This is opposite to your 3rd assumption.

The problem seems that you have assumptions that are just untrue.

Gen 1:31 So God saw everything that He made, and behold it was very good.

 

[Paul.]

Do you have this evidence?

Yes, I can provide evidence for the existence of God. It is accumulative evidence that uses inductive reasoning to reason from the known to the unknown.

First, the known: The space time continuum (or universe) is all the physical and material existence that we can know exists.

Do you have any issue with this being true?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Yes, I can provide evidence for the existence of God. It is accumulative evidence that uses inductive reasoning to reason from the known to the unknown.

I may have some issues with inductive reasoning as you go.

First, the known: The space time continuum (or universe) is all the physical and material existence that we can know exists.

Do you have any issue with this being true?

Yes I have a problem with this statement. I am not convinced that if other universes do exist that we cannot know they exist. I will say that at this time we don't know of any other material universes that do exist but how can you say we can never know they exist?

 

[cvanwey]

As I mentioned, God gave Adam a clear command / advice and told him explicitly what would happen if he ate from the tree. So, _before_ eating from the tree Adam already knew that eating would be evil. The TKGE did not impart that knowledge. This is opposite to your 1st assumption.

The phrase in Hebrew: טוֹב וָרָע, tov wa-raʿ, literally translates as good and evil, is an example of the type of figure of speech known as merism, a literary device that pairs opposite terms together in order to create a general meaning, so that the phrase "good and evil" simply implies "everything." This is seen in the Egyptian expression evil-good, which is normally employed to mean "everything." In Greek literature, Homer also uses the device when he lets Telemachus say, "I [wish to] know everything, the good and the evil." (Odyssey 20:309–310)

TKGE is to be understood to mean a tree whose fruit imparts knowledge of everything, this phrase does not denote a moral concept. God created the tree because the tree would impart useful knowledge. But God wanted to test Adam's love and obedience to Himself. Instead, Adam chose to obey Satan.


God never lets his perfect foreknowledge interfere with humans' free will and experience. He created the TKGE bec He _wanted_ Adam to eat of this tree at the right time, when He would allow Adam. This is opposite to your 2nd assumption.

God's created humans to enjoy immortality with Him and God's plan cannot be "soiled." The incarnation was not an "afterthought!" It was planned from the beginning. This is opposite to your 3rd assumption.

The problem seems that you have assumptions that are just untrue.

Gen 1:31 So God saw everything that He made, and behold it was very good.

Not going to make this long and drawn out, as it is rather simple.

- Adam could choose not to follow. Adam had yet to possess such knowledge. You are 'reading' more into this than is given. Adam lacked ability to assess. Adam gained ability to assess (only after) the 'act'; where he then gained 'knowledge.'

- This has nothing to do with 'free will'. God already knew what Adam was going to do. If He did not want Him to do it, He could have placed the tree out of reach. But He did not.

- As stated prior, God is the rule maker, as well as the rule enforcer. God sets the stage, (HE COULD HAVE SET ANY STAGE). God's foreseen plan was to decide to later create 'man', knowing (s)he would be deceived. God then knew He would have to send Himself, to Himself, to atone to Himself.

Bazaar...

 

[Andrewn]

- Adam could choose not to follow.

- This has nothing to do with 'free will'.

Do you see the contradiction between your statements? Adam could indeed choose not to follow. Indeed, he did make that choice bec he had "free will."

Adam had yet to possess such knowledge. You are 'reading' more into this than is given. Adam lacked ability to assess. Adam gained ability to assess (only after) the 'act'; where he then gained 'knowledge.'

Adam lacked certain knowledge before eating from the TKGE.

God already knew what Adam was going to do. If He did not want Him to do it, He could have placed the tree out of reach. But He did not.

You repeat this as if you never read my message. God wanted Adam to eat of this tree at the right time, when He would allow Adam. It really doesn't help you that you consider yourself more knowledgeable of the Bible than Christians. It sounds like you ate of TKGE before getting to maturity .

- As stated prior, God is the rule maker, as well as the rule enforcer.

You repeated this in your message but it's another one of your assumptions that are not really true. Think of the laws of physics. God made them but they're enforced by certain mechanisms. How does God enforce the law of gravity? How does God enforce the law of mass conservation? How does God enforce the law of sin and death / karma? But here we approach metaphysics and the answer is different in different religions.

God sets the stage, (HE COULD HAVE SET ANY STAGE).

God is love and he created you and me according to His image to reflect His love for the creation. There is no other scenario. If Adam stops reflecting His love and become know-all smart-ass, then he is no longer the human that God created. He is a lower animal. There is no love without "free will." You cannot rape someone and say that that is love. God is _not_ a rapist.

God's foreseen plan was to decide to later create 'man', knowing (s)he would be deceived.

Yes, you're right. If someone has the "free will" to not love you or trust you, there is a true risk that that person will will withdraw their love. But that is the nature of love. A person who does not have the ability to withdraw their love does not have the ability to offer their love.

God then knew He would have to send Himself, to Himself, to atone to Himself.

God knew that He would need to become a human being in order to show human beings how to love. He wanted to restore immortality that Adam lost by his transgression and human beings lose daily by their lack of trust and love.

Joh 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

 

[BigV]

This entire argument falls flat on it's face because, yet again, people have the choice to not end up in hell.

You have a choice not to end up in a Muslim or a myriad of non-Christian Hells also. And yet, you stubbornly chose all those other hells. According to your own logic.

But why would you chose Hell, willingly?

 

[Paul.]

I may have some issues with inductive reasoning as you go.

It would be less interesting if you didn't.

Yes I have a problem with this statement. I am not convinced that if other universes do exist that we cannot know they exist. I will say that at this time we don't know of any other material universes that do exist but how can you say we can never know they exist?

Thank you for pointing that out. I will phrase it better as it is a statement about the universe in which we live.

All of the known physical (or material) existence, exists within the space time continuum (or universe.)

Is that an acceptable premise?

 

[cvanwey]

Do you see the contradiction between your statements? Adam could indeed choose not to follow. Indeed, he did make that choice bec he had "free will."

Did you see that I tried to condense my answers? Each of my (3) bullet point was addressing differing statements of yours. See below...

Adam lacked certain knowledge before eating from the TKGE.

Exactly. Do we know what 'knowledge'? As I stated prior, you are reading more into this than is given from the Bible. It's reasonable to conclude Adam did not know what is considered 'bad.'

You repeat this as if you never read my message. God wanted Adam to eat of this tree at the right time, when He would allow Adam. It really doesn't help you that you consider yourself more knowledgeable of the Bible than Christians. It sounds like you ate of TKGE before getting to maturity .

In the future, I will no longer try to condense my response with you. I will respond to each and every statement, for more clarity.

Additionally, I read your response the first time. You are asserting that God wanted Adam to eat the fruit. But at a certain time.... I don't recall reading this in Verse? Maybe I missed it somewhere?

You repeated this in your message but it's another one of your assumptions that are not really true. Think of the laws of physics. God made them but they're enforced by certain mechanisms. How does God enforce the law of gravity? How does God enforce the law of mass conservation? How does God enforce the law of sin and death / karma? But here we approach metaphysics and the answer is different in different religions.

???

Making blank assertions about 'God making this and that' does not win you points. We do not even know if, not only a God exists, but furthermore, your God...?

My point here, however, is that God could make any scenario, and He chose this one. This is what I meant about not having anything to do with free will. God already knows the outcome to any scenario He would have created, which could be an infinite number of scenarios.

God is love

???

How do we know God is 'love'?

What is the definition of 'love'?

There is no other scenario. If Adam stops reflecting His love and become know-all smart-ass, then he is no longer the human that God created.

????

I feel you are not picking up what I have been putting down. God creates the rules, but also enforces the rules.

God is a subjective agent, by definition. Meaning, whatever God states, IS 'good'. If this God exists, God created the scenario for which the humans are told to follow. But how would we know if this scenario was 'good' or 'bad'?

Furthermore, if humans are told to merely follow orders, is that always 'good'? (i.e.)

If a mother states 'God told her to drown her kids', how are we to 'know' it was 'good' or 'not good', and/or from God or not from 'god'?

Maybe more 'knowledge' is necessary?

He is a lower animal. There is no love without "free will." You cannot rape someone and say that that is love. God is _not_ a rapist.

The victim has no free will, in rape.

Yes, you're right. If someone has the "free will" to not love you or trust you, there is a true risk that that person will will withdraw their love. But that is the nature of love. A person who does not have the ability to withdraw their love does not have the ability to offer their love.

My only point here was that God knows the future (apparently). God created a specific scenario, and watched it unfold exactly the way He already knew it would. He's essentially watching re-runs.

God knew that He would need to become a human being in order to show human beings how to love. He wanted to restore immortality that Adam lost by his transgression and human beings lose daily by their lack of trust and love.

Joh 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

This is my point. God has the ability to create any scenario, and He chose this one.

Bazaar....

 

[Andrewn]

It's reasonable to conclude Adam did not know what is considered 'bad.'

We can't go back to this point. I already addressed it in my 2 previous messages to you. God told Adam that eating of TKGE was bad and that Adam knew the consequences. If you still do not understand this simple point then we might as well stop the conversation.

Additionally, I read your response the first time. You are asserting that God wanted Adam to eat the fruit. But at a certain time.... I don't recall reading this in Verse? Maybe I missed it somewhere?

Why would God create the tree of Life and the TKGE unless He wanted Adam to eat their fruit? I will attempt to prove that the Bible teaching is that knowledge is good and desirable for people to seek and attain.

Gen 1:31 So God saw everything that He made, and behold it was very good.

Gen 3:22 Then the LORD God said, ‘Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.'

Pro 1:7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Pro 2:6 For the Lordgives wisdom; out of His mouth come knowledge and understanding.

2Sa 14:7 And your servant thought, ‘The word of my lord the king will set me at rest,’ for my lord the king is like the angel of God to discern good and evil. The Lord your God be with you!

Isa 7:15 He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good.

1Ki 3:9 Give your servant [=Solomon] therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, that I may discern between good and evil, for who is able to govern this your great people?

Heb 5:12-14 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.

Col 2:2-3 that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Joh 8:32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Joh 14:7 If you had known me, you would have pknown my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

2Pe 3:18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

There is absolutely no reason to think that God did not want Adam to gain knowledge or that He planted TKGE for any reason other than to ultimately give Adam that knowledge.

Making blank assertions about 'God making this and that' does not win you points. We do not even know if, not only a God exists, but furthermore, your God...?

We're not discussing the existence of God, here, we're assuming His existence. Otherwise, this conversation is really pointless. Why talk about someone who doesn't exist? That would be an exercise in futility .

 

[HitchSlap]

Yes, I can provide evidence for the existence of God.

IMO, what you provide is an argument that ticks the boxes you need to believe.

It is accumulative evidence that uses inductive reasoning to reason from the known

No problem there.

to the unknown.

This is the space where religions are born.

First, the known: The space time continuum (or universe) is all the physical and material existence that we can know exists.

Yep.

Do you have any issue with this being true?

Nope.



Your ultimate destination is one big argument from incredulity. Once you recognize this, you'll understand why we're not impressed with your syllogism.