Big Bang and creation of the universe

04/13/2005 01:01:38 PM · #301

only if illness didn't exist before the declaration

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by hopper:
you pointed out the creation of the first fib because Adam was told he was going to die and didn't ... All I said was, he did, in fact, die.

My point was that either you assume that the death many years later was caused by the fruit, or that he wouldn't have died had he not touched the fruit. This is akin to declaring that you will get sick if you walk thorugh the snow barefoot. Then claiming an illness 50 years later as proof that you were right.

04/13/2005 01:09:27 PM · #302

Hmmm... maybe God was speaking of "spiritual" death and not "physical." After Adam ate the fruit, he no longer had the same communication with God as he had previously.

I haven't read most of this thread... only the last 2 pages so I appologize if this was already mentioned.

04/13/2005 01:13:41 PM · #303

I reworded my question to be more appropriate Hopper, try again. Even so, your illness statement hardly proves a cause and effect relationship, and with no other "rules" to cause the death, you suggest that Adam would have been otherwise immortal.

04/13/2005 01:19:20 PM · #304

Hi Jessamyn... welcome to the party. ;-)

A spiritual death still doesn't address the part about holding someone else accountable for a situation that you intentionally set up and allowed to happen, and the need for such interpretation could have easily been avoided if it was more like, "Touch this and I will no longer communicate with you," or "you will die spiritually." Must everything be so vague that it can neither be proven nor disproven?

04/13/2005 01:20:34 PM · #305

i wasn't trying to prove anything

and if someone were to believe in a God that is immortal, why would it be unreasonable to believe that He could create something (or someone) that also doesn't experience physical death?

Originally posted by scalvert:

Even so, your illness statement hardly proves a cause and effect relationship

04/13/2005 01:22:26 PM · #306

just because YOU don't understand it, doesn't make it un-understandable.

Originally posted by scalvert:

04/13/2005 01:57:14 PM · #307

Originally posted by hopper:

i wasn't trying to prove anything... just because YOU don't understand it, doesn't make it un-understandable.

and if someone were to believe in a God that is immortal, why would it be unreasonable to believe that He could create something (or someone) that also doesn't experience physical death?

I see. It doesn't make sense, but it's still true. No proof is needed to believe in thousand-year-old men, talking animals and rainfall measured in hundreds of inches per hour.

04/13/2005 02:01:38 PM · #308

you win ... i shouldn't have chimed in in the first place

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by hopper:
i wasn't trying to prove anything... just because YOU don't understand it, doesn't make it un-understandable.

and if someone were to believe in a God that is immortal, why would it be unreasonable to believe that He could create something (or someone) that also doesn't experience physical death?

I see. It doesn't make sense, but it's still true. No proof is needed to believe in thousand-year-old men, talking animals and rainfall measured in hundreds of inches per hour.

04/13/2005 02:13:44 PM · #309

It's not a contest, Kris- all opinions are welcome. I'm just trying to understand assertions that don't make sense to me. Applying logic in the form of, "if this claim is true, then the following must also be true," leads to some pretty outlandish conclusions.

04/13/2005 02:23:48 PM · #310

I can accept that my thoughts seems foolish to some. When I was an athiest, I thought christians were ignorant weaklings who needed a crutch to get through life ... I was wrong.

I'm not going to be able to explain what you want explained. It's foolishness to you ... I understand that. I also know that I don't know enough about evolutionary theory to adequately debate, so I won't.

Originally posted by scalvert:

04/13/2005 02:31:41 PM · #311

Adam was warned not to touch it... he knew that there were concequences. He had a choice to make - on his own - and he made the wrong one. Do we have to know EXACTLY what bad things will happen before we make a descision? Is it not enought just to know that something bad will happen? Maybe a poor example, but here goes: In the U.S. many people eat poorly and live a sedentary life-style. They have plenty of advance warning about all the diseases they may end up with. How many of us sit around and say, "well, heart-failure I don't mind, but I guess I'll have to change if I'll end up with diabetes."
God gave adam a choice and he chose. We also have choices every day and sometimes we choose well, other times we choose poorly. When we choose poorly do we have the right to sit back and say, "God you set me up! I didn't know that would happen!"

Originally posted by scalvert:

04/13/2005 02:35:51 PM · #312

Originally posted by prozac:

But didnâ��t God, being omniscient, know Adam would eat the forbidden fruit even before Adam was created?

04/13/2005 02:37:45 PM · #313

granted, I don't know a whole lot about the theory of evolution, but is it so much harder to believe in someone being created, than to believe that we magically evolved from one cell? We had no designer, yet here we are - complicated beings with intricate parts and such a complex design that if one system is just a little off it can couse multi-system failure. A little study of the human body makes it very dificult to imagine that we could have just evolved on our own.

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by hopper:
Adam's still alive?

LOL! You're proposing that he would still be alive if he hadn't eaten the fruit?

So... an all-knowing, all-seeing entity gives you the some serious cranial capacity, then creates something he doesn't want you to have in the first place and puts it in the center of your home. He further allows a small-brained (yet talking) animal with amazingly detailed inside knowledge of the setup into your home and holds you accountable for suddenly becoming fashion-conscious after eating something that magically transferred information to your brain. Additionally, had you NOT eaten said fruit, you might still be scampering about the garden as a 6000 year old man. This is the model for the origin of man that I'm supposed believe over evolution? Oh, I feel so foolish.

04/13/2005 02:38:57 PM · #314

God knew what Adam would choose - true. But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

Originally posted by milo655321:

Originally posted by prozac:
Adam was warned not to touch it... he knew that there were concequences. He had a choice to make - on his own - and he made the wrong one. Do we have to know EXACTLY what bad things will happen before we make a descision? Is it not enought just to know that something bad will happen? Maybe a poor example, but here goes: In the U.S. many people eat poorly and live a sedentary life-style. They have plenty of advance warning about all the diseases they may end up with. How many of us sit around and say, "well, heart-failure I don't mind, but I guess I'll have to change if I'll end up with diabetes."
God gave adam a choice and he chose. We also have choices every day and sometimes we choose well, other times we choose poorly. When we choose poorly do we have the right to sit back and say, "God you set me up! I didn't know that would happen!"

But didnâ��t God, being omniscient, know Adam would eat the forbidden fruit even before Adam was created?

Message edited by author 2005-04-13 14:39:47.

04/13/2005 02:43:53 PM · #315

Originally posted by prozac:

God knew what Adam would choose - true. But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

But isnâ��t it within the capabilities of God, being omnipotent and omniscient, to have created Adam so that he had free will and yet still choose to do the correct thing every time?

04/13/2005 02:46:12 PM · #316

He could have, but He didn't... I'm not sure what you are asking...

Originally posted by milo655321:

Originally posted by prozac:
God knew what Adam would choose - true. But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

But isnâ��t it within the capabilities of God, being omnipotent and omniscient, to have created Adam so that he had free will and yet still choose to do the correct thing every time?

04/13/2005 02:47:48 PM · #317

God wanted to be chosen by a people who had the opportunity to not choose Him. Which is what we have on earth today, some choose God, others don't.

If God wanted robots, I can only assume He would have created them instead of us. Does that make sense?

Originally posted by milo655321:

04/13/2005 03:00:07 PM · #318

Originally posted by prozac:

God knew what Adam would choose - true.

Ergo, God wanted death and human suffering on Earth.

Originally posted by prozac:

But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

So youâ��re saying that God cannot create a being with free will who chooses to do the right thing every time?

Originally posted by hopper:

God wanted to be chosen by a people who had the opportunity to not choose Him. Which is what we have on earth today, some choose God, others don't.
If God wanted robots, I can only assume He would have created them instead of us. Does that make sense?

What about freely choosing to do the right thing makes one a robot? An omnipotent God could created a being that has free will and yet still chooses to do the right thing every time. The being is still making the choice to do the right thing.

Edited for verb tense.

Message edited by author 2005-04-13 15:13:44.

04/13/2005 03:13:38 PM · #319

I understand what you're saying, but it seems to contradict. Not being able to will yourself to do something isn't "free" will. That would be more like limited will.

If you're asking why God doesn't just make His own existence a little more obvious ... I guess I'd have to say I wish He did. I simply don't know ...

... but that alone doesn't mean He doesn't exist, it just means He didn't ask for my opinion before doing things :)

Originally posted by milo655321:

04/13/2005 03:13:59 PM · #320

Originally posted by prozac:

God knew what Adam would choose - true. But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

Not really. If God created Adam, then He also created Adam's brain and any inherent tendencies toward desire or disobedience. He then created something Adam wasn't supposed to touch under penalty of death, and put it right in front of him (planted it, you might say). He then created a talking serpent with inside knowledge on this Pandora's apple, and allowed it to mingle with his pet project. Once the conclusion of this entrapment (which God knew all along would happen) was reached, Adam was indeed put to death tens or hundreds of years later instead of continuing to live forever.

Message edited by author 2005-04-13 15:17:54.

04/13/2005 03:18:08 PM · #321

Originally posted by milo655321:

Originally posted by prozac:
God knew what Adam would choose - true.

Ergo, God wanted death and human suffering on Earth.

How you came to this conclusion is beyond me... He wanted Adam to choose right (choose life). Adam is the one who opened the door to pain and suffering. -Not what God was hoping for.

Originally posted by prozac:
But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

So youâ��re saying that God cannot create a being with free will who can choose to do the right thing every time?

He did create a being with a free will who can choose to do the right thing every time. Adam didn't. We don't.

Originally posted by hopper:
God wanted to be chosen by a people who had the opportunity to not choose Him. Which is what we have on earth today, some choose God, others don't.
If God wanted robots, I can only assume He would have created them instead of us. Does that make sense?

What about freely choosing to do the right thing makes one a robot? An omnipotent God could created a being that has free will and yet still chooses to do the right thing every time. The being is still making the choice to do the right thing.

See above... by robot he meant that God could have created us to just always do the right without our having a choice - Mindless creatures that would do whatever they are told.

Message edited by author 2005-04-13 15:23:48.

04/13/2005 03:22:59 PM · #322

It's difficult to speculate "WHY" God did something the way He did. But by itself, that doesn't prove or disprove anything about His existence, right?

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by prozac:
God knew what Adam would choose - true. But, he still gave him the choice. Adam could have chosen differently.

Not really. If God created Adam, then He also created Adam's brain and any inherent tendencies toward desire or disobedience. He then created something Adam wasn't supposed to touch under penalty of death, and put it right in front of him (planted it, you might say). He then created a talking serpent with inside knowledge on this Pandora's apple, and allowed it to mingle with his pet project. Once the conclusion of this entrapment (which God knew all along would happen) was reached, Adam was indeed put to death tens or hundreds of years instead of continuing to live forever.

04/13/2005 03:23:19 PM · #323

Originally posted by hopper:

What Iâ��m drive at is this: How can a perfect being create an imperfect creature? Isnâ��t it within his nature to only create perfectly? Even with the existence of free will, how can a creature created by a perfect being choose imperfectly?

04/13/2005 03:23:33 PM · #324

Originally posted by prozac:

Mindless creatures that would do whatever they are told.

Please give me an example of any living creature with the ability to choose that does whatever it's told.