Evidence for God from Science

ThirdOption wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Why did God create the world still knowing people would choose against Him? Well He always intended us to be graciously (i.e., freely) saved through Christ:

But the choice Adam made (which God knew certainly would happen including the results) brought billions of people to hell. But the choice Adam made (which God knew certainly would happen including the results) brought billions of people to hell.

So you have an issue also with a hell doctrine? I'm not going off on that tangent, but it has been discussed within the thread God + love + hell = ?. But let me just say Adam and Eve may have ruined humanity's relationship to God, but Scripture is also clear everyone is held accountable for their own sins and choices (not Adam's).

I find it hard to believe God, who is meant to be wise and insightful, wouldn't have known that many would turn away from Him. I'm thinking that perhaps only a god who is blind and ignorant of the nature of his own creation, wouldn't have had any inkling of a clue. Yet, Scripture clearly reveals that God declared the end from the beginning, and even have planned Christ before time (as quoted above + Isaiah 46:9-11).

Your response appears to be one backed by emotion, but given the fact that Scripture obviously backs that God knew Adam would sin, how do you reconcile such with the problems you see exist? I'll further expand upon my own which you challenged.

TO wrote:Now, it appears that God settled for less here. Going ahead with his plan of creating man (who would certainly rebel against him) for the intended purpose of "soul making/shaping" at the expense of billions of SOUL to be destroyed in hell. If God's concern was man's soul, he would not go ahead with what he foresaw would happen.

The soul shaping is only one aspect to answering why God created despite knowing people would sin (which obviously would cause pain to others to some extent). Yet, I additionally said in concluding my last post: "our temporary world was [also] created as a grounds for people to choose to accept and love God, or reject Him.

TO wrote:Iranaeus' solution is indeed problematic. If God created this world to be "soul making" and "soul shaping" via the sin of Adam which God knew would result to billions of souls in hell, then that doesn't pictures a loving God whose concern was man's SOUL.

Underlining your point seems to be that God knowingly created a world where many didn't choose Him and so aren't going to be with Him. Therefore God wasn't concerned with our soul (and so soul-shaping goes out the window). Firstly, by "soul shaping" (which Irenaeus uses) I mean "character shaping," and this still happens regardless of ones final outcome in relation to God. Secondly, you did not present any reason why a deeper and more full character would be of no value to those who in the afterlife who reject God. Finally, when one looks at the bigger picture, it seems obvious that ones character as shaped within this world created by God, either becomes shaped towards God or against God. I never said ones soul would be shaped towards God (a required premise for your arguent to hold up). Therefore there exists a close relationship between how God setup our world not only to shape our character, but also in how such allows to be clearly revealed whether or not we love and desire Him.

TO wrote:My concern is centered on God himself and his Word in light of the traditional belief that God knew for certain man would do. That traditional belief, I guess, mars the integrity of God and his Word. If the Bible records (as inspired) that God commanded Adam not to eat of the fruit as to prevent him from eating, then any beliefs that contradict that command or somehow makes that command insincere should be questioned.

But I would advocate that God's command was sincere, although He knew it would be broken. As Felgar pointed out earlier, God gave a command which allowed Adam and Eve a decision to make on whether they would be for or against God. This does not mean they received their free will, but only they enacted upon their existing free will for the first time in relation to God. They chose to go against God's will, and so showed their character and will to be incompatible with God's. So God's command was sincere as it served to reveal clearly to all where they lied in relation to God.

Additionally, there is a difference between knowing and acting. God can know we will act in certain ways, but we don't actually act in those ways until we get the chance to. And if we don't get the chance to then we didn't really. Therefore God's command was sincere as although He knew Adam would choose wrongly, Adam hadn't actually chosen wrongly until given the opportunity. Therefore, I see no reason why God's command would not be sincere.

TO wrote:Therefore, God could not be certain that Adam would definitely eat of the fruit. Of course, anyone could believe that God was certain of that but he must face the implication that God's command (His Word) was insincere and that He was not seriously hoping Adam not to eat of the fruit.

But given that Scripture says otherwise of God (refer to my quotes of Scripture in my previous post), if Scripture is inspired and correct (I'm assuming you accept this to be true?), then God was certain that Adam would eat the fruit as such is required if He knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-11).

TO wrote:I would rather say that God knew Adam would POSSIBLY eat of the fruit and POSSIBLY not eat of the fruit. In short, God knew Adam MIGHT eat of the fruit and MIGHT NOT eat of the fruit. God knows both choices are POSSIBLE, none of which was CERTAIN in God's mind.

Then God is not omniscient as He does not know future truths. And furthermore God is not all powerful as He can't see all truths. Thus, you really end up with a distorted God not advocated by Christianity.

Kurieuo.

Kurieuo wrote:Additionally, there is a difference between knowing and acting. God can know we will act in certain ways, but we don't actually act in those ways until we get the chance to. And if we don't get the chance to then we didn't really. Therefore God's command was sincere as although He knew Adam would choose wrongly, Adam hadn't actually chosen wrongly until given the opportunity. Therefore, I see no reason why God's command would not be sincere.

I think this is where the problem lies. Let me ask you, was God CERTAIN that Adam would disobey if he would create him? I'd assume your asnwer would be yes. But that's where the problem lies. If God knew for certain (from eternity past) that Adam would act in a certain way even, then the command would be insincere.

What you are trying to say is the very thing you said in your last paragraph in answer to my previous post. You said: "Then God is not omniscient as He does not know future truths. And furthermore God is not all powerful as He can't see all truths. Thus, you really end up with a distorted God not advocated by Christianity."

What you are trying to tell me is that God doesn't know for sure if we would get the chance to act in certain ways (i.e., future truth). Because, as you said, "if we don't get the chance to then we didn't really." But if God is omniscient (by your definition of the word) then God surely knew from eternity past what actions are we going to do. He would certainly know whether we would get the chance to act on certain ways or not. What you actually said is what I am talking about, that God knows as possible (not certain) that we would act in a certain way but the final actuality still depends on us. Thus, God cannot be both sincere with the command NOT to eat of the fruit and at the same time know for certain that Adam woudl CERTAINLY eat the fruit. It's either God was sincere with his command or he was not certain what Adam would finally do.

Your reasoning makes no sense TO because you're thinking as a temporal being. Reality is different for God, and what appears to be sound logic to us breaks when you live outside of time. The command was both sincere AND God knew it would be broken. It was sincere because Adam had a real choice, just like we ALL do. God knew it would be broken because the Bible tells us He did.

Felgar wrote:Your reasoning makes no sense TO because you're thinking as a temporal being. Reality is different for God, and what appears to be sound logic to us breaks when you live outside of time. The command was both sincere AND God knew it would be broken. It was sincere because Adam had a real choice, just like we ALL do. God knew it would be broken because the Bible tells us He did.

How did you know all of that, Felgar? How did you know that reality is different for God? Have you experienced to be God so that you can say reality is different for God? Have you experienced God's state of affairs so that you can say our "sound logic" breaks up there? How did you know? What's your basis in saying all these?

The command cannot be sincere (at least) if God was already sure that Adam would break it. How could he SINCERELY warn Adam NOT to eat of it when the eating of the fruit was already inevitable because God saw it will surely happen? What God knows to be inevitable must surely come to pass (at least in your view), and if he knows that Adam would inevitably eat of the fruit, then the command to NOT to eat of the fruit is irrelevant if not illogical for God.

God could only be sincere with the command if what he certainly knows to be true could still be false. If God knowing A would do X in Y is true; then A doing ~X in Y is false. And God cannot sincerely command Adam to do what he knows be in contrary to what he knows to be true.

I thought this place wasn't to try and disprove the bible with our inability to understand the vastness and complexity that is God. The bible states God is all knowing and All powerful, he is the Almighty and as such God knew that Adam would go against him. Just because we can't fully understand why God would decree the command even though he knew the outcome doesn't take away from God. The Bible we as christians believe is divinely inspired and as such just because something doesn't make perfect sense for you doesn't mean its wrong.

The simplest explanation that can be given is this:
1.) if a little kid comes to my house and i have a candy bar on the table and I tell the kid not to take it otherwise i will punish him. Now like God say i knew the kid would take the candy bar, but by telling him not too and by saying i would punish him gives me a reason to go through with the punishment.

Now what i think your having problems with is this idea of why would God create a situation that would cause many people to go to Hell. However Hell is a choice and even though God knew these people would go to Hell it is still a choice they made and frankly those people going to Hell is a price God knew would have to be paid so that great prophets and men could come about who would create a relationship with God that far transcended that which even Adam had. Say after Adam sprouted many generations of people who rejected God, but then a man was born who accepted God into his life. Its all relative, but what matters is God knows regardless if it doesn't make sense to you.

ThirdOption wrote:Let me ask you, was God CERTAIN that Adam would disobey if he would create him? I'd assume your asnwer would be yes. But that's where the problem lies. If God knew for certain (from eternity past) that Adam would act in a certain way even, then the command would be insincere.

My whole last post was to do with this, and I believe I provided ample reasoning that God could know for certain Adam and Eve would sin and still be sincere when He told them not to. That said, the ball is in your court, firstly to break down my points on God's sincereity, and then to provide your own points which show why God's command couldn't be sincere. You're acting like this is a given when it is far from obvious.

TO wrote:What you are trying to tell me is that God doesn't know for sure if we would get the chance to act in certain ways (i.e., future truth).

No. What would be more correct of my words is that God does know the future on any world He decides to create before creating it. If God is omniscient, then this has to be so. Yet, God's knowing in now way makes His interaction and relationship to that world insincere. If God's knowing Adam would sin makes His command insincere, then perhaps our purpose and meaning in life is insincere because God already knows everything that will happen. Does that make sense? It doesn't to me.

TO wrote:But if God is omniscient (by your definition of the word) then God surely knew from eternity past what actions are we going to do. He would certainly know whether we would get the chance to act on certain ways or not.

Yeah—if that particular world was created where we act in a certain way, God would certainly know all our choices and actions. But the thing is, say God decided not to create our world with Adam and Eve, then although God would know Adam and Eve would choose to sin against Him if created, they wouldn't get the chance to (seeing as the world wasn't created), and so they didn't really sin. You appear to be confusing knowledge of a future event, as having already made it happen.

Kurieuo.

ThirdOption wrote:How did you know all of that, Felgar? How did you know that reality is different for God? Have you experienced to be God so that you can say reality is different for God? Have you experienced God's state of affairs so that you can say our "sound logic" breaks up there? How did you know? What's your basis in saying all these?

My basis, like everyone else's here is that we're told in the Bible that God knew. Jesus was planned before He even created the Universe. (sorry if this has been posted...)

2 Timothy 1:9b-10
This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

Plus, of course God has a differnent existance. How can He be "the first and the last", the "I am", and "the beginning and the end". Simply because he lives outside of time. A day is as a thousand years. Also, when's the last time a human spoke a universe into existance?

Did the Bible say that our reality is different from God's reality? Are you saying that the Bible says that this reality we have is NOT the reality that God experiences right now? If the Bible says that, could you tell where it is?

Yes, Felgar, the Bible says that God "knows all things" just as the Bible says that Jesus "knows all things" (John 16:30)and yet he doesn't know the time of his return.

I believe that God knows all things that there is to know. But future decisions, like that of Adam's, are not known by God until Adam made the decision. As I have shown you, it is a logical contradiction for God to command Adam NOT to do something, when God surely knows that it will inded come to pass. God cannot logically (let alone seriously/genuinely) command Adam as to PREVENT him from eating of the fruit when the eating itself is surely to happen as God certainly knew it.

Besides, there are other biblical examples that God does something because he was NOT CERTAIN what man would do. One example is Exodus 4:8-9: "8 Then the LORD said, "If they do not believe you or pay attention to the first miraculous sign, they may believe the second. 9 But if they do not believe these two signs or listen to you, take some water from the Nile and pour it on the dry ground. The water you take from the river will become blood on the ground."

If God was already CERTAIn what man would choose or do, why did God say “IF they do not believe you” WHEN he is already certain of all decisions including “believing”? Isn't it that “IF” is only use when one is not certain about something?

And why would God say, “They MAY believe the second” ? Were God not sure that they would believe the second sign? Why “MAY”? It should have been, “Surely they will believe the second.”

Besides, why need a second sign? Were God not sure that Israel would believe the first sign he gave? If it were true that God is already certain of all of man's future decision, he wouldn't need a second sign to perform before Israel's eyes. He could easily perform just ONE SIGN of which he'll be definitely sure Israel would believe. Unless the account in Exodus 4 was a mere charade, a God who is already certain of everything does not need a second sign to perform. But who would be willing to interpret that as a charade?

As I mentioned elsewhere, there is really only one kind of omniscience, and that is knowing all truths (past, present and future). Anything less is a play on words. The Biblical God reveals Himself as knowing future truths as well as past (e.g., Mark 14:30).

Additionally, there are Biblical passages which if taken literally of God, would imply God has arms, hands and other features of human anatomy. There are also passages which suggest God can be surprised, refreshed and change His mind about things. Go to skeptics website, and I'm sure you'll find all of these things as arguments against God as revealed by the Bible. Yet, Christians would not necessarily take these examples literally, because God has been defined elsewhere as having spiritual and infinite qualities. And so it makes more sense to say that God is simply trying to relate to us on our own level.

Now nowhere in Scripture does it say God did not know the future. It may portray God as being ignorant, but this does not mean God was actually so. If you can provide the Scriptures which outrightly declare "God does not know...", then you have a case. Otherwise I think this remains a point of silence.

As this thread has now taken off track, I will close it. This tangent can be discussed further at http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... .php?t=123. If anyone wants this thread reopened to discuss the original topic, feel free to PM me.

Kurieuo.