Isn't God evil, if He allowed Adam's fall to harm us?

[JAL]

Neither Adam's sin or your sin is God's doing.

If God gave me a sinful nature while I was yet an innocent fetus, inherited from Adam, then I'm sorry to tell you this, He's largely the agent of my wrongdoing.

Secondly it's a contradiction in terms to claim that Adam's stain got transferred to others. Sin is a voluntary act. As such a sinful nature cannot be transferred to an innocent person who has never voluntarily sinned.

 

[Neogaia777]

No if someone raped a bunch of children, we shouldn't be 'eternally grateful' because he eventually gave them ice cream and candy. Your theodicy doesn't work. Please find a better one.

That person would go to hell, or not even exist anymore, and the other ones would spend eternity in heaven with God, and, there are "other factors" as well, in part, that God makes the suffering that only some few have have to suffer or go through for the ultimate good and the saving of many, much if not all of the time also.

The depths of the mysteries involved in how he does this "exactly" and specifically, especially in such cases like you mention, are beyond my comprehension or knowing down to the smallest details specifically, but I know he does, almost all, if not all of every single time in every single case, etc.

And there are "rewards" for suffering also, or higher positions offered or given to those who have suffered more, in heaven, or in the afterlife, and it was, or would, or will be "in line or in perfect accord with their own hearts desire", they just didn't know they would have to suffer so much to get it, but in heaven, they will not regret it, no not ever, once they are there, etc... The sufferings made them able and fully capable and fully equipped for the, or those positions also...

Even Christ Himself learned, or what made him qualified for even His position, was the things He suffered, same also with many others who talked about the sufferings, like Paul, and others crucified and tortured for their faith, etc... Put in prison, beaten, tortured, tormented, and humiliated, persecuted to an excessive degree, etc...

It is their sufferings that gets them the highest positions in heaven, and qualifies them for them, that they wanted to begin with, just didn't know or check the "price tag" I guess you could say, but no one will ever regret that there anymore, and in fact, it will all even be forgotten at or by that time...

Like I said, God makes all right and just in the end, and no one will regret it (anymore) either, not at all...

If some few can suffer for the good of very, very many, rather than all suffer for no reason, or no good reason at all, then don't you think that would be right or just, especially if it was the only way for God to give us what we want...? Or what both us and Him wants, etc...? Some "few" also suffer more so that others or the many will not have to suffer as much or a lot "less", also, etc...

Trust me it was the "only way"...

God Bless!

 

[JAL]

Adam and Eve committed the first sin thus opening their knowledge to good and evil. God cursed them including the serpent that decieved them. Jesus Christ of Nazareth bound the strong man. Though we are tempted, we now have an advocate with the Father. I am one who believes children who are not at the age of accountability are saved souls. Whether or not they carry the sin of Adam, is a moot point.

Through no fault of their own, children suffer rape, starvation, disease, and violence. Nice. This is your maximally kind God?

FYI: Merely regurgitating the traditional views doesn't count as a defense against the charges of contradiction.

 

[Neogaia777]

That person would go to hell, or not even exist anymore, and the other ones would spend eternity in heaven with God, and, there are "other factors" as well, in part, that God makes the suffering that only some few have have to suffer or go through for the ultimate good and the saving of many, much if not all of the time also.

The depths of the mysteries involved in how he does this "exactly" and specifically, especially in such cases like you mention, are beyond my comprehension or knowing down to the smallest details specifically, but I know he does, almost all, if not all of every single time in every single case, etc.

And there are "rewards" for suffering also, or higher positions offered or given to those who have suffered more, in heaven, or in the afterlife, and it was, or would, or will be "in line or in perfect accord with their own hearts desire", they just didn't know they would have to suffer so much to get it, but in heaven, they will not regret it, no not ever, once they are there, etc... The sufferings made them able and fully capable and fully equipped for the, or those positions also...

Even Christ Himself learned, or what made him qualified for even His position, was the things He suffered, same also with many others who talked about the sufferings, like Paul, and others crucified and tortured for their faith, etc... Put in prison, beaten, tortured, tormented, and humiliated, persecuted to an excessive degree, etc...

It is their sufferings that gets them the highest positions in heaven, and qualifies them for them, that they wanted to begin with, just didn't know or check the "price tag" I guess you could say, but no one will ever regret that there anymore, and in fact, it will all even be forgotten at or by that time...

Like I said, God makes all right and just in the end, and no one will regret it (anymore) either, not at all...

If some few can suffer for the good of very, very many, rather than all suffer for no reason, or no good reason at all, then don't you think that would be right or just, especially if it was the only way for God to give us what we want...? Or what both us and Him wants, etc...? Some "few" also suffer more so that others or the many will not have to suffer as much or a lot "less", also, etc...

Trust me it was the "only way"...

God Bless!

The mysteries of God when it comes to suffering, and sufferings, are very, very, very deep and great indeed, but I have faith that, are all ultimately good and for the very greatest and most highest and best and greatest benefits and highest and ultimate good of all...

But very, very deep... You could get lost and it could get very dark going down that rabbit hole...

And I've only just touched on it just a little bit because of that...

God Bless!

 

[zoidar]

If God gave me a sinful nature while I was yet an innocent fetus, inherited from Adam, then I'm sorry to tell you this, He's largely the agent of my wrongdoing.

Secondly it's a contradiction in terms to claim that Adam's stain got transferred to others. Sin is a voluntary act. As such a sinful nature cannot be transferred to an innocent person who has never voluntarily sinned.

I don't believe God gave you a sinful nature while you were an innocent fetus. I believe it's a consequence of man's sin.

 

[Redwingfan9]

Again,already refuted at post 12. As that post shows,logically we MUST hold God to human standards to avoid a blatant logical contradiction.

Your comments at post 12 are devoid.of scripture, especially when you define kindness. Again, you're trying to hold God to worldly standards and when he doesn't meet them you blame God or redefine him to suit your preconceptions.

 

[JAL]

That person would go to hell, or not even exist anymore...

I think you missed the point. That person was an analogy for God.

What I'm saying is that if God sets up a world where the unborn innocent, through no fault of their own, inherit a sinful nature, then this would seem to make Him partially at fault for any evils that befall the children (such as rape). Ultimately it extrapolates to God being somewhat of a child-rapist Himself. Your 'solution' is to claim that He eventually gives the raped children ice cream and candy for which we should all be 'eternally grateful'. Unsatisfactory.

That person would go to hell

Correct. A God who instigates the raping of children would, in my view, belong in hell. He's an evil monster.

Look, I'm confident that you wouldn't create a world like this, if given the option - a world where all men pay for Adam's sin? I sure wouldn't. Since you would be so kind, why can't you embrace a theodicy where God is at least as kind as you are?

If some few can suffer for the good of very, very many, rather than all suffer for no reason, or no good reason at all, then don't you think that would be right or just, especially if it was the only way for God to give us what we want...? Or what both us and Him wants, etc...? Some "few" also suffer more so that others or the many will not have to suffer as much or a lot "less", also, etc...

Trust me it was the "only way"...

God Bless!

Why is such an evil framework the only way to give us what we want? You're not making sense here.

 

[JAL]

Your comments at post 12 are devoid.of scripture, especially when you define kindness. Again, you're trying to hold God to worldly standards and when he doesn't meet them you blame God or redefine him to suit your preconceptions.

But if you think it's my definition of kindness that's really the import, you've misunderstood. The argument at post 12 is that the student of the Bible needs to be consistent. What is YOUR definition of kindness? Whatever it is, you must hold God to it, to avoid the sort of contradiction alleged in the post.

I think you're just avoiding the argument of post 12 because it refutes your position.

 

[Redwingfan9]

If we are going to define kindness shouldn't scripture define it for us? Especially so if the intent is to hold God to it. Otherwise all of us are going to have our own definitions and expect God to live up to them regardless of what scripture might say. That's a recipe for everyone creating their own god.

 

[JAL]

I don't believe God gave you a sinful nature while you were an innocent fetus. I believe it's a consequence of man's sin.

Ok so then your view would be basically the Orthodox view, it seems.

So the unborn are not classified as sinners, they are born innocent. If that's the case, why would Paul assume that all men need redemption? Given 100 billion children born innocent, wouldn't some of them likely abstain from sin - even as many of the angels abstained from sin?

In fact Paul said that all have sinned. When he said that, there were plenty of unborn fetuses all around him. When did they sin? He's pretty clear, right? They sinned in Adam.

I'm just not getting your position or how it jives with Scripture.

 

[JAL]

If we are going to define kindness shouldn't scripture define it for us? Especially so if the intent is to hold God to it. Otherwise all of us are going to have our own definitions and expect God to live up to them regardless of what scripture might say. That's a recipe for everyone creating their own god.

Ultimately we have to interpret the text, and avoid contradiction. Yes, obviously the interpreter is seeking exegesis rather than eisigesis.

 

[zoidar]

Ok so then your view would be basically the Orthodox view, it seems.

So the unborn are not classified as sinners, they are born innocent. If that's the case, why would Paul assume that all men need redemption? Given 100 billion children born innocent, wouldn't some of them likely abstain from sin - even as many of the angels abstained from sin?

In fact Paul said that all have sinned. When he said that, there were plenty of unborn fetuses all around him. When did they sin? He's pretty clear, right? They sinned in Adam.

I'm just not getting your position or how it jives with Scripture.

I believe fetuses and infants have a sinful nature, but not that it's God's doing.

 

[Neogaia777]

I think you missed the point. That person was an analogy for God.

What I'm saying is that if God sets up a world where the unborn innocent, through no fault of their own, inherit a sinful nature, then this would seem to make Him partially at fault for any evils that befall the children (such as rape). Ultimately it extrapolates to God being somewhat of a child-rapist Himself. Your 'solution' is to claim that He eventually gives the raped children ice cream and candy for which we should all be 'eternally grateful'. Unsatisfactory.

Correct. A God who instigates the raping of children would, in my view, belong in hell. He's an evil monster.

Look, I'm confident that you wouldn't create a world like this, if given the option - a world where all men pay for Adam's sin? I sure wouldn't. Since you would be so kind, why can't you embrace a theodicy where God is at least as kind as you are?

Why is such an evil framework the only way to give us what we want? You're not making sense here.

If you going to equate or liken God to a child molesting raping monster, then I can't do anything for you but pray for you...

Peace, I'm out,

God Bless!

 

[JAL]

I believe fetuses and infants have a sinful nature, but not that it's God's doing.

But how is it maximal kindness for God to permit such a travesty to befall them?

 

[JAL]

If you going to equate or liken God to a child molesting raping monster, then I can't do anything for you but pray for you...

Peace, I'm out,

God Bless!

That's not my position. That was my extrapolation of your position.

 

[Redwingfan9]

Ultimately we have to interpret the text, and avoid contradiction. Yes, obviously the interpreter is seeking exegesis rather than eisigesis.

You need to define terms based on scripture, which is something I haven't seen any of in this thread from you.

 

[Neogaia777]

I think you missed the point. That person was an analogy for God.

What I'm saying is that if God sets up a world where the unborn innocent, through no fault of their own, inherit a sinful nature, then this would seem to make Him partially at fault for any evils that befall the children (such as rape). Ultimately it extrapolates to God being somewhat of a child-rapist Himself. Your 'solution' is to claim that He eventually gives the raped children ice cream and candy for which we should all be 'eternally grateful'. Unsatisfactory.

Correct. A God who instigates the raping of children would, in my view, belong in hell. He's an evil monster.

Look, I'm confident that you wouldn't create a world like this, if given the option - a world where all men pay for Adam's sin? I sure wouldn't. Since you would be so kind, why can't you embrace a theodicy where God is at least as kind as you are?

Why is such an evil framework the only way to give us what we want? You're not making sense here.

We wanted to be like God, to be one with Him, and the only way to give us that, and because that is secretly His desire for us as well, is to have to go through what He went through and what people, like you, are doing to Him right now, with things like "this" and these...

Your the one raping and molesting Him, trying to usurp Him, ect, by blaspheming Him, if your going to take it that far or take it to "that level"...

You think you are more kind than God...?

Claiming you could create a better world than Him...? With a better plan also, and better way to fulfill or make that plan come to pass, etc...?

You can't even begin to comprehend His plans and what they entail to make or cause or make that plan happen or come to pass, but your greater and better than God, right...?

Wasn't that Satan's or Lucifer's mistake...?

Anyway, I'll be praying for you, peace,

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

That's not my position. That was my extrapolation of your position.

Sure, right, well, forgive me if I don't believe you...

That you would even suggest it shows that there is something seriously wrong with you, anyway, I'll be praying for you and those like you...

God Bless!

 

[JAL]

You need to define terms based on scripture, which is something I haven't seen any of in this thread from you.

I defined love as a dedication to minimize suffering. How is that inconsistent with Scripture? Have you ever read the parable of the Good Samaritan? Have you ever read any of the NT? The Law? The prophets?

 

[JAL]

Sure, right, well, forgive me if I don't believe you...

That you would even suggest it shows that there is something seriously wrong with you, anyway, I'll be praying for you and those like you...

God Bless!

We wanted to be like God, to be one with Him, and the only way to give us that, and because that is secretly His desire for us as well, is to have to go through what He went through and what people, like you, are doing to Him right now, with things like "this" and these...

Your the one raping and molesting Him, trying to usurp Him, ect, by blaspheming Him, if your going to take it that far or take it to "that level"...

You think you are more kind than God...?

Claiming you could create a better world than Him...? With a better plan also, and better way to fulfill or make that plan come to pass, etc...?

You can't even begin to comprehend His plans and what they entail to make or cause or make that plan happen or come to pass, but your greater and better than God, right...?

Wasn't that Satan's or Lucifer's mistake...?

Anyway, I'll be praying for you, peace,

God Bless!

Actually if you knew my definition of God, you'd see that He's ineffably kinder than men.

But if I go with the traditional understanding of God, He seems to extrapolate to an evil monster.