Evidence for God from Science

Hi Emuse,

I have been watching this debate and I have to say I'm very impressed with your whole approach and the dignity you bring to your interactions.

I have not responded because it seems you will get drowned in a sea of Christian responses, and besides, there are some very capable and well thought out Christians on this site who are engaging with you.

This one caught my eye because I have been thinking about this alot...

Emuse wrote:God presumably has free will. He is also incapable of sin. Therefore it is possible to possess free will and never seen and to be incapable of sin. God created us in his image (according to Genesis) - but not enough in his image to make us incapable of sin as he is..

It seems to me that the relationships are not fully explored here:

Commonalities:

1. God has freewill.
2. Humans have freewill.

Differences:

1. God does not sin.
2. Humans do.

Another difference that has not been touched upon and that, in my eyes, may be important is:

1. God is uncreated.
2. Humans are created.

It seems to me that it may well be a logical impossibility to create a sentient (freewilled) being that does not have a propensity to sin. Sin is essentially an act of putting self before others. Of course, it can also be an act of willful rebellion, but I would say that most sin is simply about putting the needs of self first, regardless of the impact on those around you.

Particularly in the case of human creation I think the following:

As a tentative theistic evolutionist, I believe that God used evolution to get a creature to the point where it was sufficiently well developed for him to breathe his nature and understanding of morality into it. Now catering to your own needs first is the domain of the animal kingdom where acts of altruism are certainly not the order of the day. The act of making us aware of morality meant that for the first time we could choose to forego our natural tendency to be essentially self-preserving like animals.

I know this only barely touches on what you stated, because it explores only one method of creation and there are obviously others (such as the instant creation of sentient beings). It would explain in our case why we seem to have a natural gravity towards sin that we must fight. It does not explain evil - like the act of mutilating or murdering another human for pleasure - something not seen in the animal kingdom (except maybe things like wales playing with seals before they kill them - and this is clearly of a different order).

I must say that most other Christians on this site probably reject evolution so would see my ideas as nonsense. We are a mixed bag.

In the end (for the purposes of talking about freewill and sin) you cannot really compare an infinite uncreated being with finite created creatures. God is not bound to a timeline and is self-sufficient. We are not self sufficient and have a choice to let God meet our need or attempt to fulfill them ourselves. This is probably a condition of all possible created beings.

A complicating factor seems to be that when God appeared incarnated as Jesus he probably had an ability to sin. In my mind it is doubtful that Satan would have wasted time trying to tempt Jesus to sin if Jesus was incapable of it.

Sorry for ranting on a bit, but you crossed over an issue lightly and every issue has a wealth of assumptions and complexities.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Puritan Lad,

I agree, I did not mean earn going to heaven from a works perspective, but earn going to heaven because you have been chosen to repent of your sins and accept Christ's gift of salvation-so my usage was inaccurate and rushed.

Also, we do not know who those elect babies are and that is my point and I do not beleive in the age of accountability. I do believe that God can reach out and save whomever he wants and he works his plan everywhere in the world. This does not mean that there are multiple Christ figures, it just means that God will make himself known to those he chooses too and without the Gospel, no one has the ability to make the free choice to receive God's grace.

Dan

There is a series of books I found useful in my search for God and truth.

They are written by a journalist, Lee Strobel. In the books he interviews many experts and scholars in various fields to ask them tough questions.

The books are: The Case for Faith, The Case for Christ, and
The Case for a Creator.

The Case for Faith deals with 8 objections to faith, such as
"Since evil and suffering exist a loving god cannot"
"God Isn't worthy to worship if he kills innocent children"
"A loving god would never torture people in hell"

There is 4 others, but the above three relate to what we are discussing here in this thread.

A Peter John Kreeft PHD and author deals with it not being logically possible to have free will and no possibility of moral evil. That a world without hate also would be a world without true love.

They Norman Geisler PHD , Author, deals with among other things the "age of accountability " "according to the bible , every child who dies before the age of accountability goes to heaven..." He uses Isaiah 7:16 and also King David expecting to see his son, who died at birth, in heaven.

He then quotes JESUS. " Let the little children come to me , and do not hinder them , for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these".

Geisler says " There is considerable amount of other scriptural support for this position as well"

JP Moreland,PHD , says "The Bible is very clear that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked"
Moreland later says " God doesn't torture people in hell"
"hell is not a torture chamber"
Moreland does also believe that hell is a separation from God.
Later in the chapter he talks about the flames of hell being a figure of speech. "hell is a place of utter darkness and yet there are flames, flames would light things up"
Flames stands for judgement.
Gnashing of teeth is a state of anger or realization of great loss and not of torture.

Later he talks about that the justice of hell will be adjusted according to each persons deeds.

Moreland doesn't believe in the annihilation view, but in everlasting separation. He does make a good arguement for his view.

I am not one to say that I know for certain what hell is or what it will be.
I just hope to not go there.

I know one thing and that my God and my understanding of God need to be filtered through verses such as the one below.

John 4:8 says, He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love

GOD IS LOVE!

Mike the Bluesman