Why would God create a flawed creation?

[Nithavela]

Willing human vessels?

 

[Nithavela]

Your god on the other hand is always in position to solve whatever problem they are facing. What on earth is he doing to help the kids? If I was in his position, none of those kids would die, so what does he have against those innocent kids?

If there was a god and he protected anything innocent from any harm, life would never have gone past the stage of bacteria.

 

[WoundedDeep]

A quick google search unearthed this.... Hebrew Concordance: t?·m?? -- 33 Occurrences Your assertion is plainly wrong. ta-mut shows up in 33 places in the Old Testament, many of them clearly mean physical death.

An example is Exodus 7:18 where it says "the fish in the Nile will die (ta-mut)" Are you suggesting the fish suffered a "spiritual death"?

I told you already I am not a student of Hebrew. I do not know whether ta-mut and ya-mat signify a difference in tense or a difference in substance. It does not matter, because even in Exodus 7:18, ta-mut means "will die". That's a future tense. So applying that back to Genesis 2:17, God said they will die (in the future) the day they ate that forbidden fruit. That's exactly what happened because Adam and Eve did die in the future. There are so many different types of Hebrew words used to describe "death", clearly there must be a reason and a difference. Ta-mut may not be as simple as you thought it is.

I didn't say it's the most accurate translation, I said it was widely accepted as a more accurate translation than the KJV.

And I just told you it isn't. An "accurate" translation with over 10 missing verses? Heh.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Your logic is almost laughable. Who told you He has not stopped children from dying? He uses willing human vessels all the time to send aid and charity to children in need, He uses human governments to punish child murderers and abusers. If people like you were even willing to acknowledge Him as God and through Him stop evildoers, the world would have already been different and you will see no death or suffering. He wants to accomplish material things through material means, that is why He made humans in the first place. But you, being rebellious against Him, not only prohibit Him from stopping evil in the world through humans by not wanting Him in your lives, you point your fingers at Him blaming Him for not stepping in. WHAT THEN ARE YOU DOING TO HELP THOSE POOR KIDS?

How do we distinguish between someone who is doing good because God is using him and someone who is doing good simply because it is good? Believing in him is not a prerequisite to doing good, so either he is using many non-Christians to do good without their awareness of it, or they are doing good without being used by him at all.

Let me tell you if you start doing something for those kids today, you are already seeing God at work helping the kids. Just because He does not appear like a genie and pop miracles does not mean He has not done anything.

It seems to me that there is people helping people rather than God helping people. Personally, when a doctor cures an illness I am inclined to thank the doctor, the medical science community, and all the people involved (patients, clinicians and scientists) in making the cure a reality. Why should I assume that they were merely used like puppets by a supernatural agent? Can't they do good on their own?

 

[WoundedDeep]

The corpses of those children are a pretty good giveaway...

Yeah, because people are not willing to do what He commands to help these children. They hate Him and would rather ignore the children then to let Him work through them and make wonder and miracles for the poor kids.

How powerful is your god when he needs people to do his work for him? Why not just step in and fix the problems with his own creation himself?

He does not need, He wants His creation to do it with Him. What is the point of creating any human being if they are just going to be fence-sitters watching others do evil and do nothing to help? He could well do away with people if they are just going to sit on the fence and watch Him make miracles. His creation are you and me, if we are not willing, are you suggesting He should automate us to do His work?

Which might be compelling, apart from the fact that a lot of the people who acknowledge him as god are the people causing the problems in the first place. There aren't too many atheists in Ethiopia for example, there are an awful lot of Christians though.

Then their acknowledgement means nothing. Anyone who truly acknowledges and understands God knows in their conscience what they should and should not do.

He arguably achieved the greatest material thing in history (the creation of the universe) without the need for humans, so what's his problem now?

The material universe don't possess our mental capabilities, do they? He created men in His image, therefore He expects us to work like He does to create good (according to our individual abilities) in the limited world we now live. Is that absurd?

Secondly, I'm not rebellious against him, I don't believe he exists. Your accusation towards me is exactly the same as me accusing you of being rebellious against Allah. I'm sure you don't consider yourself in rebellion against Allah, as you don't believe Allah is real.

You seem to forget that rebellion starts with unbelief. That is what happened with Adam and Eve, it can happen to you too. You may not be knowingly rebelling against Him, but through unbelief, the "serpent" can lead you to unconsciously rebel against Him. That's not an illusion.

Lastly, what am I doing to help the kids? Nothing, apart from the odd charitable donation. Why? Because I'm not in a position to help them anymore than to make the odd charitable donation.

What if I tell you then God gave you that inspiration to donate, and thus He somehow worked through you to help the kids? He worked through a donkey to speak to an evil man, He certainly can do the same to men, regardless of their belief about Him.

Your god on the other hand is always in position to solve whatever problem they are facing. What on earth is he doing to help the kids? If I was in his position, none of those kids would die, so what does he have against those innocent kids?

I already told you, He helps the kids through human vessels, and for that, He needs people to be willing to do that. If you are suggesting that He should come in on His own to just rescue the kids, then you are telling Him the rest of humanity who will not help are redundant. So what? Should He wipe the lazy bums and selfish snobs from existence?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Yeah, because people are not willing to do what He commands to help these children. They hate Him and would rather ignore the children then to let Him work through them and make wonder and miracles for the poor kids.

Even if they did hate God (they don't; you're confusing a lack of belief for hate), what does that have to do with helping the children? How are the two related?

 

[WoundedDeep]

You have it backwards.

This is how worship of Yahweh started, that it also demonstrable. The biblical account is a distortion of the earlier polytheism that the Israelites originally adhered to.

No, polytheism started with demonic worship, and its inventor is no one other than the devil and his 1/3 of fallen angels. Satan has been on earth since the day Adam and Eve was created, why then is it a surprise that polytheism started early in human history? There was no need for religion in the early days for God's followers because humans were few in number and knowledge about God was easily passed down from generations of faithful God-worshippers. Religion started with Satan because he wanted to change God worship into worshipping him and therefore he needed a system like polytheism to confuse the masses about who God is.

Because I disagree with you, and you're not at all open to the idea that I might actually be right.

I am open only to the truth. You have yet to establish that you have the truth, or I would have acknowledged it.

You're interpreting my disagreement as an inability to grasp the concepts. I know exactly the position you're attempting to argue, I have no problems grasping that... I'm just telling you that your beliefs are wrong. You aren't open to considering that position though.

The reason I believe you have not grasped my concepts is because you clearly argue illogically about things which require only a simple understanding. For instance, you keep telling me that the Fall was unavoidable when I told you repeatedly that the Fall WAS avoidable or else God could not have logically commanded Adam and Eve to "Do not eat". Your argument that given Adam and Eve's circumstance, they could not have avoided eating that fruit is false because God required a very simple thing from them to avoid eating that fruit: faith in His words. What they truly lacked was faith, they did not lack the ability to avoid eating that fruit. You obviously could not tell the difference.

The problem is you have also argued that god intended for them to learn the difference between good and evil. If that's the case, then eating from the tree was a requirement. Even if god told them not to, if he is indeed omniscient he must have known they were going to anyway.

You're ignoring that glaring point though, because you have to in order for your argument to maintain any level of coherence. But it doesn't make that point go away.

Nonsense, that glaring point you keep repeating is an illogical conclusion in the first place. I really hate to repeat myself over and over. See above.

 

[Inkfingers]

It seems to me that there is people helping people rather than God helping people.

How would you tell the difference?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

How would you tell the difference?

That's the very same question I asked:

How do we distinguish between someone who is doing good because God is using him and someone who is doing good simply because it is good?

 

[Inkfingers]

That's the very same question I asked:

And I'm asking what your answer to it is.

 

[Dave Ellis]

If there was a god and he protected anything innocent from any harm, life would never have gone past the stage of bacteria.

Not if the genesis narrative is true, and that's the framework in which we're debating here.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I told you already I am not a student of Hebrew. I do not know whether ta-mut and ya-mat signify a difference in tense or a difference in substance.

If that's the case, then it's dishonest for you to even engage in that line of argument. You put forward the ta-mut and ya-mat difference as proof for why you are right and my argument is wrong.

If you did not know that prior to making the argument, it's deceitful to make the argument. Were you hoping I wouldn't look into it?

It does not matter, because even in Exodus 7:18, ta-mut means "will die". That's a future tense. So applying that back to Genesis 2:17, God said they will die (in the future) the day they ate that forbidden fruit. That's exactly what happened because Adam and Eve did die in the future. There are so many different types of Hebrew words used to describe "death", clearly there must be a reason and a difference. Ta-mut may not be as simple as you thought it is.

What?

Of course he was speaking in a future tense, he was giving them a warning. It's like if I told you that you'll die if you decide to jump out of a plane without a parachute. What other tense could he say it in?

The statement was when they eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they will die. That didn't happen, god lied to them.

And before you come back with the defense that Adam and Eve eventually died, well they were eventually going to die anyway, they were not created immortal.

For proof, we can refer back to Genesis 3:22. They were cast out of the garden to prevent them from eating from the tree of life, which would have caused them to live forever. If they were already immortal, then why would this matter? This is only an issue if they were created without eternal life.

So you can't argue that they lost their immortality from eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Since they never ate from the tree of life, they never had it to begin with.

And I just told you it isn't. An "accurate" translation with over 10 missing verses? Heh.

That's a red herring, the fact 10 verses in another book are missing has nothing to do with the subject matter here. Also, do you know why those verses were left out?

 

[brixken7]

"It is an experience of evil Elohim has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it" (Ecclesiastes 1:13; 3:10; Concordant version and the 1599 Geneva Bible).

THIS fully explains the "flawed creation."

-- brixken7

 

[mkrist]

But how would Adam and Eve even know what sin was? They were created perfect weren't they? If they were created along with everything else in the garden, why would they suspect the serpent was deceiving them? They were innocent, like little children. Is it possible they didn't know the serpent had fallen and was God's rival? Maybe they thought, since he was created by God they had no reason not to trust him. Did they even know what it meant to doubt God? And why was the punishment so severe? If I tell my 3 or 4 year old not to touch a hot stove and he reaches out to touch it anyway, I don't let him do it to teach him a lesson. I'd stop him. He's too young and innocent to completeley understand what could happen to him. Adam and Eve were given one shot. Did they disobey because they wanted to be like God, or were they just testing their boundaries to see what would happen - like a child would? They test what their parents say to see if it's true or not. How many of our children go through that and then, as they get older, say,"I wish I had listened to you Mom and Dad. You were so right. I see it now." Did Adam and Eve even know what disobedience was? As a result, they suffered severely and so would the entire human race. If the sin of one man caused death to everyone, why does the death of Jesus only save some people? The curse falls on all, why? Maybe I wouldn't have disobeyed God. Doesn't seem fair. I didn't have a choice to be born with sin and according to predestination, I don't choose to be saved either. God decides who will be His elect from the beginning. Please understand, I consider myself a Christian. I believe in Jesus and that I'm a sinner in need of a Savior. These issues are things I'm struggling with and don't know what to do.

 

[WoundedDeep]

If that's the case, then it's dishonest for you to even engage in that line of argument. You put forward the ta-mut and ya-mat difference as proof for why you are right and my argument is wrong.

If you did not know that prior to making the argument, it's deceitful to make the argument. Were you hoping I wouldn't look into it?

What? How is that dishonest? They ARE different, whether in tense or meaning. That was my point. The only thing I have not been able to prove is that ta-mut meant spiritual death, if I had a better study in Hebrew I might be able to show you. Pointing out that they are different is not being dishonest when it is a fact that they are.

What?

Of course he was speaking in a future tense, he was giving them a warning. It's like if I told you that you'll die if you decide to jump out of a plane without a parachute. What other tense could he say it in?

You don't seem to realise what the actual verse is.

"for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die". (actual verse)

This is a whole world of difference from saying:

"for once thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die".

Putting "will die" (future event) in the context of "the day" means that death is a future event on "the day" they eat the fruit. If God meant an immediate death upon eating the fruit, He will not speak that way. How is that hard to understand?

And before you come back with the defense that Adam and Eve eventually died, well they were eventually going to die anyway, they were not created immortal.

Wrong, there was no death for Adam and Eve before they ate the forbidden fruit. Death came through sin into the world, as the Bible confirms. When there was no sin, there was no death.

For proof, we can refer back to Genesis 3:22. They were cast out of the garden to prevent them from eating from the tree of life, which would have caused them to live forever. If they were already immortal, then why would this matter? This is only an issue if they were created without eternal life.

That is mere speculation. The tree of life does give immortality, but that does not mean God created Adam and Eve subject to death. After Adam and Eve took the forbidden fruit, they obviously lost eternal life and needed to eat from the tree of life to restore what was lost. You don't have any idea what you are talking about.

That's a red herring, the fact 10 verses in another book are missing has nothing to do with the subject matter here. Also, do you know why those verses were left out?

Lol? You raised the NIV and tried to use that to refute me. I refuted back by saying NIV is not reliable. So how is that a red herring? They were left out on purpose because the numberings were missing. Why? Ask the translators.

 

[brixken7]

" If the sin of one man caused death to everyone, why does the death of Jesus only save some people?" --mkrist
........................

His death for the world will -- ultimately -- save the world. That's why Christ is called "the savior of the world" twice in the Scriptures. "For as in Adam ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive" (I Corinthians 15:22). Sadly, most professing Christians have not the simple faith to believe this simple truth.

 

[WoundedDeep]

But how would Adam and Eve even know what sin was? They were created perfect weren't they? If they were created along with everything else in the garden, why would they suspect the serpent was deceiving them? They were innocent, like little children. Is it possible they didn't know the serpent had fallen and was God's rival? Maybe they thought, since he was created by God they had no reason not to trust him. Did they even know what it meant to doubt God? And why was the punishment so severe? If I tell my 3 or 4 year old not to touch a hot stove and he reaches out to touch it anyway, I don't let him do it to teach him a lesson. I'd stop him. He's too young and innocent to completeley understand what could happen to him. Adam and Eve were given one shot. Did they disobey because they wanted to be like God, or were they just testing their boundaries to see what would happen - like a child would? They test what their parents say to see if it's true or not. How many of our children go through that and then, as they get older, say,"I wish I had listened to you Mom and Dad. You were so right. I see it now." Did Adam and Eve even know what disobedience was? As a result, they suffered severely and so would the entire human race. If the sin of one man caused death to everyone, why does the death of Jesus only save some people? The curse falls on all, why? Maybe I wouldn't have disobeyed God. Doesn't seem fair. I didn't have a choice to be born with sin and according to predestination, I don't choose to be saved either. God decides who will be His elect from the beginning. Please understand, I consider myself a Christian. I believe in Jesus and that I'm a sinner in need of a Savior. These issues are things I'm struggling with and don't know what to do.

They do not need to suspect anything about the serpent. They had a clear directive from God not to eat from the forbidden tree, God even told them the consequence beforehand. It is then common sense for them to obey God and avoid listening to a foreign voice (from the serpent) which had no acquaintance with them like God did.

You should not think of Adam and Eve as real children, having only the cognitive abilities of a child. Adam and Eve were created as adults, they have certain mental capabilities to exercise judgment already. They know God is the highest authority, so obviously His words are the final authority. Any creation of God who expresses a contrary opinion from what God said should not divert Adam and Eve from obeying God. How is it reasonable that they should believe a created being, especially when this created being is contradicting God's express commands? How could Adam and Eve not know that by eating from the forbidden tree, they are wilfully going against God's instructions? They knew, but they still did it.

They disobeyed because they did not believe what God said. That gave the devil an opportunity to lie to them, and entice them to eat from the forbidden tree. They were also obviously greedy, wanting to be like God, but refusing to do things the way God instructs. Satan was very crafty, his words to Eve was a mixture of truth and lies, downplaying the effects of sin and lying about what the tree of knowledge of good and evil can do.

The curse applied to all man because the tree of knowledge of good and evil had an effect on mankind that was generational. Just like how diseases can be passed down through generations, the curse of sin passed down through generations.

I don't subscribe at all to the predestination doctrine. God predestines only His plan to save mankind, He did not predestine who ought to be saved. But He does know what we will choose individually throughout human history. It is the same old lie about how God causes people to sin, He doesn't. God neither causes people to sin, nor does He cause people to be damned. He asked Israel in the OT to choose between life and death (this directly contradicts predestination doctrine), He gave the power of choice to humanity, therefore the predestination of who gets saved is a big lie.

 

[brixken7]

They do not need to suspect anything about the serpent. They had a clear directive from God not to eat from the forbidden tree, God even told them the consequence beforehand. It is then common sense for them to obey God and avoid listening to a foreign voice (from the serpent) which had no acquaintance with them like God did.

You should not think of Adam and Eve as real children, having only the cognitive abilities of a child. Adam and Eve were created as adults, they have certain mental capabilities to exercise judgment already. They know God is the highest authority, so obviously His words are the final authority. Any creation of God who expresses a contrary opinion from what God said should not divert Adam and Eve from obeying God. How is it reasonable that they should believe a created being, especially when this created being is contradicting God's express commands? How could Adam and Eve not know that by eating from the forbidden tree, they are wilfully going against God's instructions? They knew, but they still did it.

They disobeyed because they did not believe what God said. That gave the devil an opportunity to lie to them, and entice them to eat from the forbidden tree. They were also obviously greedy, wanting to be like God, but refusing to do things the way God instructs. Satan was very crafty, his words to Eve was a mixture of truth and lies, downplaying the effects of sin and lying about what the tree of knowledge of good and evil can do.

The curse applied to all man because the tree of knowledge of good and evil had an effect on mankind that was generational. Just like how diseases can be passed down through generations, the curse of sin passed down through generations.

I don't subscribe at all to the predestination doctrine. God predestines only His plan to save mankind, He did not predestine who ought to be saved. But He does know what we will choose individually throughout human history. It is the same old lie about how God causes people to sin, He doesn't. God neither causes people to sin, nor does He cause people to be damned. He asked Israel in the OT to choose between life and death (this directly contradicts predestination doctrine), He gave the power of choice to humanity, therefore the predestination of who gets saved is a big lie.

.................

WoundedDeep...you talk a lot...use a lot of words...but NO SCRIPTURES.
Do you feel your thoughts are more important than God's?

 

[Oafman]

"It is an experience of evil Elohim has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it" (Ecclesiastes 1:13; 3:10; Concordant version and the 1599 Geneva Bible).

THIS fully explains the "flawed creation."

-- brixken7

He could just have created us humble, and avoided the need for a painful lesson

 

[Davian]