Why because we are in a fallen creation, according to the Bible. There are many problems in this world and paradise would be quite different then this one. Can you just imagine a world with no disease, no suffering, no viruses, no fungi. If this wasn't a fallen creation we would have no exploding volcanoes, no tornadoes, no rock slides, no flash floods, no droughts, no deserts, no cyclones, no brush fires, no grinding glaciers, no dangerous canyons or cliffs, no ice capped mountains, no frozen lakes, no earthquakes none of these natural calamities that some attribute to a ‘fallen world’.
Creation fell when Adam fell, therefore sin, so to speak, killed creation. As a result, we live in an imperfect world, with the effects of sin running through it. We see that the universe is running down. That is, everything is moving toward chaos, becoming less organized. Furthermore, because sin is in the world, mankind is unable to live in harmony. Nations rise against nations, and peoples against peoples. War and conflict occur with the loss of life, and with injuries to those who survive. Devastation is left in its wake.
Paradise, I believe, will have just the right amount of rain, just the right amount of sunshine and the temperature would always be around 70 degrees. Someone might think I am describing Hawaii. But Hawaii is always threatened by volcanic activity. Hardly a perfect paradise that God can create. I am very curious to see the 'new earth' promised to us.Earth was once like this paradise described there were no disease and suffering We would have all these problems if we listened to God when he instructed us Genesis 2:16-17 "Of every tree of the garden eating thou dost eat; and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it—dying thou dost die."
If we listened, things would be different, there would be no tumors to fester in our bodies, no sickness what so ever and no death to speak of. What a beautiful world it was.
What's your vision of paradise? Join my curiosity, give yourself to Jesus today. Receive the gift that God wants us to have. Let's explore the new earth that God will give us, together.
How can you determine the world used to not have disease? You are using a book; however, you have not demonstrated that this book was in fact divinely inspired. If this claim is true, we should be able to look at nature and determine if this claim is true...and if there is no evidence for it, it is useless to claim this is true.
ReplyDeleteAlso, within this fictional story is the biggest setup of all time. Omniscient, omnipotent God, having prior knowledge of Adam/Eve's actions decided to go ahead and temp them anyways...and then punishes not just them, but every human that ever has and ever will exist. This is psychotic....I mean, that you can believe that the design was at fault rather than the designer. Not to mention the fact that this was a fable...there were no Adam and Eve. The "first" humans had to be a population of reproducing individuals who split off from the parent population. We know where it happened, approximately when it happened, and with the genome, we have some strong hypotheses as to how it happened. You have a story about talking snakes, magic apples, and a rib-woman....
The "Fall" doesn't give God a "torture his creatures for free card"....he designed us, knew future events, and so it is ALL His fault (if he exists). I mean, unless you admit that God doesn't really care about us; then I would understand suffering and disease.
P.S. Looking forward to your "Noah" post. Sharpening my claws as we speak.
Clostridiophile ,
ReplyDelete"You are using a book; however, you have not demonstrated that this book was in fact divinely inspired."
That might be an interesting post to discuss then, thanks.
"Omniscient, omnipotent God, having prior knowledge of Adam/Eve's actions decided to go ahead and temp them anyways.."
That is just not true James 1:13 "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:"
God gave us free will, if you lust after something that is your deal not God's. Your gripes and complaints are unsubstantiated.
"You have a story..." And you have a story of humans evolving from a rodent billions of years ago. Are you claiming the story of the Bible isn't plausible? Please answer that question, Is the story of the Bible a plausible explanation of how Creation happened?
"The "Fall" doesn't give God a "torture his creatures for free card" Without Law a society can't exist. God gave us Laws to follow, if you don't follow them then the punishment will be severe. No one makes you break our laws but if you feel you must then you will go to jail. It's justified!
But God loved you so much he gave you an opportunity to "cash in" that get out of jail free card he gave you but you must take it out of that pocket of yours and use it. It does no one any good to just keep it hidden. Endorse it! Repent and Trust and you can use it. Don't endorse it, when you die it will be rendered void. Checks have expiration dates unless you endorse it/cash it in beforehand. Get it?
Doing some research for the Noah post. I want it to be understandable and effective, but I need time. Maybe it will help teach you patience.
Dan,
ReplyDeleteThere is a bit of a confusion about logic here:
Clos said:
"Omniscient, omnipotent God, having prior knowledge of Adam/Eve's actions decided to go ahead and temp them anyways..."
Your response was:
That is just not true James 1:13 "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:"
So, because James 1:13 says that God has not tempted anybody it means that God putting the tree right there were it can be tempting is not tempting Adam and Eve? Did omniscient God not know the "nature" of his creation? If he knew their nature, he was tempting them.
This James 1:13 only convinces me that the Bible is contradictory, not that you have an argument. An argument would be some logical construct that shows me, with premises and logic, that what God did cannot qualify as tempting. Not just an assertion that just says: "God has not tempted anybody." What you need is something that says: When God put the tree over there he was not really tempting Adam and Eve because [logical construct here].
You see?
G.E.
Again, well said G.E.,
ReplyDeleteLet me attempt to explain it further. If I place a naked child in front of you are you tempted to be a pedophile? Any normal person would say 'of course not!' Do you tempt a child telling them not to run into the streets? Do we tempt thieves by possessing wallets and purses? These things are just as they are, things. The temptation comes when someone 'lusts" after that thing, whatever it is. It's not my fault that I own a car, if a car thief walks by. The lust of one's own heart is what is tempting you,not God. If I place a joint in front of Cheech and Chong would they smoke it? Sure! Well a person that doesn't smoke pot wouldn't be tempted in the least. It's all perception of desire. In self not outside influence. Just because a bank leaves the vault door open doesn't give you the right to take everything, in fact one should do the right thing and tell the bank that they made a mistake and left the door open.
What about that homeless guy that returned the purse with a thousand dollars in it.
The temptation is within. Deny thy flesh, Seek God.
Get it?
Now THAT is an argument!
ReplyDeleteStill I am not convinced. The way you presented your argument it looks very obvious and I cannot but agree that in those cases no temptation should happen (I am always happy to hear of those cases of deep honesty, thanks for the link). However, let us change the presentation: knowing the nature of society as it is, I would not leave a very expensive car obviously open and with windows down in a neighborhood with a bad reputation. Would you? I agree that temptation is within, but if you leave your very expensive car in such circumstances, knowingly, are you guilty or not of tempting people's nature? (I would agree that limits are blur, and I chose an extreme example, but the important point is what happens when you KNOW where you are leaving your car open and unprotected)
There are more details to the Adam and Eve story, but that for now.
(Sorry about so much deleting, I made more than one mistake in my presentation and editing, more than once)
G.E.
Oh, just for clarification. I am not saying that if you tempt people's nature and they fall for it they are not guilty. I am not saying they have the right to steal your car under those circumstances. All I am saying is that you putting the car in danger is also wrong.
ReplyDeleteG.E.
G.E>,
ReplyDeleteAll I am saying is that you putting the car in danger is also wrong.
I understand your point, but shouldn't I be able to to leave my wallet out when I invite you over to a barbecue? In a perfect world shouldn't I be able to trust you with anything and vice versa? Wouldn't that be "heavenly." I would love to 'entertain the thought' of a society where there is never a second thought of trust. We would be able to just blindly, trust each other because of the love we have for each other without thoughts of deceit or malice.
Utopian thinking? Maybe, but can you possibly imagine such a place? What a great world this would truly be if we can fully, without one devious thought, trust thy neighbor. Even go as far to think we can just run up to a lion and pet him and rub his belly like a house cat. Isaiah 11:6-8 comes to mind.
What a wonderful time it will be when you realize, it's not a dream at all, it's Heaven.
The problem, Dan, is that all these examples-tempting that is-demonstrates god's colosal cruelty. I don't believe for a second the story is true, I think this was a poor attempt by the human authors to explain away suffering in a world run by a loving god by placing the blame on the dirty sinners-the creation. However, the rules that the "good" book claims were dictated by The Dictator make it impossible for humans to follow. "Lust" is involuntary. I was sitting in a massage place today as my wife was getting waxed and massaged and there was a gorgeous blond with a black miniskirt and high heels walking back and forth past me. Those thoughts cannot be helped. But your merciful god will punish me for my thoughts? That is sick.
ReplyDeleteNow you tell me that because a couple people ate an apple ALL of humanity was then cursed by your god...and you call this justice and mercy? What if they didn't but their children ate of it, or the next generation? What if they had broken any rule however minor; I mean any form of disobedience would presumably have gotten ALL of us cursed. The whole thing is a set-up. Now, given the assertion by the major churches that god is both omniscient and omnipotent, He already knew before he created that tree that his "first" people would eat of it. By definition. If he has foreknowledge of the event-due to the claim of transcendence, we really have no "free-will".
Not to mention the uncomfortable fact (for you) that God not only punished the purpetrators of the crime, he punished EVERYONE subsequent to them. Is this morality?
"Doing some research for the Noah post. I want it to be understandable and effective, but I need time. Maybe it will help teach you patience."
ReplyDeleteNot impatient...just making sure you don't forget.
Dan said, "You have a story..." And you have a story of humans evolving from a rodent billions of years ago. Are you claiming the story of the Bible isn't plausible? Please answer that question, Is the story of the Bible a plausible explanation of how Creation happened?"
No. It is not. The Bible story might have been plausible, but it gets the order of things wrong...we can actually test the claims. Same with the Noah story, we can actually look at the Earth's history and determine whether this is true or not. Sorry to tell you this...but you are wasting your time trying to present a case for it. It's been tried and found wanting. Also, I don't have a "story" of human evolution handed down from village to village over thousands of years and taught as the unalterable truth....we have found numerous hominids which over time become less ape-like and more human-like. I can access the human genome and compare it to other genomes online..if I don't believe their account, I can extract my own genomic DNA, add some reagents, start pyrosequencing on the 454 machine at my lab and determine whether their record matches the DNA I have sequenced. There is no evidence for a talking snake, a rib-woman, a magic apple, and YHWH. The earth is not 6,000 years old. You are appealing to authority and nothing more.
Dan said: "The "Fall" doesn't give God a "torture his creatures for free card" Without Law a society can't exist. God gave us Laws to follow, if you don't follow them then the punishment will be severe. No one makes you break our laws but if you feel you must then you will go to jail. It's justified!"
But at least our laws don't call for the punishment of the children of the offender. If we don't follow God's laws, according to your holy book, he gets so cranky that he decides to make life hell for future humans....even though he already knew what was going to happen. What a prick.
Dan said, "But God loved you so much he gave you an opportunity to "cash in" that get out of jail free card he gave you but you must take it out of that pocket of yours and use it. It does no one any good to just keep it hidden. Endorse it! Repent and Trust and you can use it. Don't endorse it, when you die it will be rendered void. Checks have expiration dates unless you endorse it/cash it in beforehand. Get it?"
We've been over this. His "get out of jail free card" was him having himself killed so that he could save us from himself....you are brainwashed, Dan. I'm sorry to say, but this is the most absurd notion I have ever heard (once I took my own blinders off). Compulsory belief doesn't work either, Dan, especially when the being you are talking about is ALL-knowing.
If you are correct about "free-will" which I don't think is possible with your God, part of this freedom to obey necessitates my knowing that He actually exists. Otherwise, how is my choice informed? Am I to just take your word, Dan, that it is true, when I have read it myself and was very unimpressed. I've read other holy books that claim the same inspiration...they can't all be right. What if you are wrong, Dan? Of course this isn't possible, because you know that you are right. How is it moral for your God to punish me if I don't have any reason to believe? You may say that I can't claim ignorance about laws in our country...but the difference is that I can look them up, and I know that authors actually existed. I don't have to beleive anything on insufficient evidence in order to read our laws and accept them. You have a book, one of thousands that humans have written...but this one, one of a handful, claims to be inspired and dictated by an invisible, cosmic being. You "get it", Dan? Do you see my point?
I'm going to post this part of my question again:
ReplyDelete"How can you determine the world used to not have disease? You are using a book; however, you have not demonstrated that this book was in fact divinely inspired. If this claim is true, we should be able to look at nature and determine if this claim is true...and if there is no evidence for it, it is useless to claim this is true."
I understand your point, but shouldn't I be able to to leave my wallet out when I invite you over to a barbecue? ... Heaven
ReplyDeleteYes Dan, but that is off the point.
Anyway, nice to see we can have a conversation.
I do not know if I will read lots of posts the next couple of weeks, perhaps more. But occasionally.
Have a fantastic journey of discovery and demystification of what has been passed to you as the "beliefs" of an atheist.
I do not mean that you will accept anything as true, nor that you should stop your belief in God, but that you will find lots of things you have been told, or implied, are ridiculous.
G.E.
PS Clos is raw and direct (I think so am I). This is a scientist tendency. So, do not take it personally. He will give you his honest point of view.
"PS Clos is raw and direct (I think so am I). This is a scientist tendency. So, do not take it personally. He will give you his honest point of view."
ReplyDeleteAmen, G_E, I am through wasting time with niceties, I have no more patience for this. Dan, if you are in the business of "debunking"...maybe you should start.
"Utopian thinking? Maybe, but can you possibly imagine such a place? What a great world this would truly be if we can fully, without one devious thought, trust thy neighbor. Even go as far to think we can just run up to a lion and pet him and rub his belly like a house cat. Isaiah 11:6-8 comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteWhat a wonderful time it will be when you realize, it's not a dream at all, it's Heaven."
Then why do you claim your god set up nature to act as it does? Limited resources....hunger...poverty....why not just set up a utopia..rather than this "best of all possible worlds"?
clos:
ReplyDeleteI count 5 of your posts, to 1 of Dan's...
Perhaps you could give him an opportunity to respond to your first disagreement before you write 4 more addendums to your original disagreement...
You make it next to impossible to reply without losing track of where the conversation is going...
Sorry, I'm not trying to speak for you here Dan, but I've seen this done before - it's like a filibuster where the atheist will go on for 2 or 3 screens about what appears to be the most amazing opinion ever, without ever really saying anything of significance, only to end off the comment with some big whopper of a fallacious argument, demanding that you provide evidence for what they refuse to even consider might be true...
One thought, one point of view, then wait...
If you're truly interested in his perspective, you'll appreciate the thought that goes into his retort...
If you simply want to argue, I can only imagine that you're going to wallow in your dissatisfied state for a LONG time...
"I count 5 of your posts, to 1 of Dan's...
ReplyDeletePerhaps you could give him an opportunity to respond to your first disagreement before you write 4 more addendums to your original disagreement..."
Ben, I'm sure Dan is capable of reading a few paragraphs and responding. I responded to sequencial posts by Dan, so I'm sure he is capable....well, actually, he isn't because he doesn't know much about the topic and I am correct here.
Plus, he'll have all the opportunity he needs, I'm going to be away from the computer for the next few days...so have at it, Dan.
Look. Science is difficult. A lot of things don't just fit on a bumper sticker or a blog response. To that end, I'd like you to read an article I wrote on the subject of suffering and evolution.
ReplyDeletehttp://hambydammit.wordpress.com/2009/03/16/evolution-and-suffering/
This post is actually a continuation of another, which makes a more pointed observation:
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/a-bit-of-idle-contemplation/
Theist explanations of suffering fail to take into account our anthropomorphic bias in failing to ask and answer the very obvious question, "Why do we eat?"
Science can answer the question of suffering. Religion cannot. Sorry, folks.
Hambydammit,
ReplyDeleteScience can answer the question of suffering.
You are just not understanding the purpose of science.
Science is an attempt to understand the natural world in a natural way. Science then in that sense is restricted to natural explanations for natural phenomena. If a natural explanation is inadequate then science stops.
WOW this has to be one of creationist most self condradictory fabels.
ReplyDeleteWhere do I begin?
Firstly for the garden of eden pre-sin to be completly without suffering there would have to be nothing that could cause pain/suffering. So no trees for adam and eve to trip over, no teeth for them to bite there tounge with, they couldn't eat anything cause they might choke...
I could go on and on with the infinite things that could cause pain.
Secondly pre-sin God was still the all knowing all loving create. so In the moments before adam sinning God would have still been in control. therefore God made adam/eve to sin.
Then post-sin all the infinate things that can cause pain and suffering appeared. Who then created these "evil" things?
Lastly, Dan you don't understand the pupose of science. Science is simply "asking questions". So science can understand suffering however you have to look at each every senario individually. There is no devine power/action resonsible for all suffering.