Tired of the "why did God allow ……." posts.

[Simplelogic]

Isaiah 55:11 So is My word that goeth out of My mouth, It turneth not back unto Me empty, But hath done that which I desired, And prosperously effected that for which I sent it.

God is whole, and unchanging . Creation is the illusion of many, of duality, of diversity, of time, of change. -- You're assuming that God fails. With God all things are possible. The only impossibility is failure.

-- Their wanting to be like God, required worship. They would need reason to have such a want- except perhaps due to His absense. They were left to be independent. But after searching themselves for His likeness, they were lacking. This lack gave them the curiosity, and the incentive to search for their God in themselves. And we do this, to this day. We go by trial and error, until the Son of Man is glorified.

The text doesn't say Adam knew about death. Eve knew what God said, but didn't necessarily know about death. Either neither of them trusted God's warning, or they had reason to subvert the warning. So again, the question becomes, why was the serpent's misinformation effective? Why did Eve observe a fruit that she was inclined towards, calling it good to eat, and pleasing to the eye? Why is there an attractive, deadly tree in God's creation? Did it serve a purpose?

Eve absolutely knew that death was a negative thing. This is why the serpent said "you won't die". Obviously we are to conclude that the issue wasn't whether death was properly understood or not. That is nowhere in the text.

 

[Simplelogic]

You're tired of the problem of evil, huh? Well, your fatigue is going to do nothing at all to change the fact the problem is very real.

I have no problem with the concept of evil. I get it. I have a problem with fake man made religions claiming that God is responsible for mans evil. Many even go so far as to say God created evil!

 

[Ingledsva]

Then why did the serpent tell her that "she would not die"? This obviously means that Eve knew what death was. The serpent simply convinced Eve that God had lied to them. Plain and simple. It was also Eve's lust for power which caused her sin..once again, evil.

6When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Gen 3: 6

And again - there can be no evil, - if they have not eaten of the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of such - YET!


*

 

[Ingledsva]

ctually it shows him murdering, and enslaving, like an angry, spiteful, skitzo, = like man, - because the Bible is written by man, - and they wrote themselves in to their God idea.

Murder? No. YHVH did bring calamity upon evil humans. As He will again in our day. Enslaving? You choose to read your feminist biased into the text and assume that just because women were subservient, they were horribly treated. You relabel marriage as rape and pretend that every man in history was some crazy misogynistic monster, hell bent on controlling woman. I think I know exactly why you are so against the Hebrew scriptures:

To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your labor pains; with pain you will give birth to children. You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you." Gen 3: 16

It seems like you have a lot of reason to discredit the God of the Hebrew scriptures.

That is funny, you seem to have a problem with women whom have an opinion different then your own. LOL!

- but changing the words to, "bring calamity," does not change what the story says he did - murder people, including the innocent children, for adult so-called sins = skitzo!

And the rest is even funnier, - the feminist attack, - as what I was talking about, - is that - in the story - every time he doesn't like something done by the people - it tells us he causes them to lose the battle, die, and-or be taken into SLAVERY. Then he feels bad and helps them out, - and then does it again.

PS. Adam and Chav'vah is just a story, - and only she (not all women) was told that - for her part of the sin, her sentence, - so why would that be a problem for me? Or any other woman?

*

*

 

[Simplelogic]

And again - there can be no evil, - if they have not eaten of the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of such - YET!


*

Just because Eve didn't have first hand knowledge of evil does not mean that her decision wasn't evil. This is just sill. The text clearly shows that Eve and Adam knew what was right and chose to believe another voice in the hopes of becoming like God. Once they acted on it, they became aware of the full capacity of evil and its detrimental effects on the human condition.

 

[Simplelogic]

That is funny, you seem to have a problem with women whom have an opinion different then your own. LOL!

- but changing the words to, "bring calamity," does not change what the story says he did - murder people, including the innocent children, for adult so-called sins = skitzo!

And the rest is even funnier, - the feminist attack, - as what I was talking about, - is that - in the story - every time he doesn't like something done by the people - it tells us he causes them to lose the battle, die, and-or be taken into SLAVERY. Then he feels bad and helps them out, - and then does it again.

PS. Adam and Chav'vah is just a story, - and only she (not all women) was told that - for her part of the sin, her sentence, - so why would that be a problem for me? Or any other woman?

*

*

Ha! This makes sense. Paint me as some misogynistic male just because I disagree with you and call out your man hatred. I could have predicted you would go there.

Yes. God's supernatural protection from enemies requires man to be in obedience and relationship with Him. Sorry if you don't like that. The Bible shows God going through great lengths to get His people to repent before withdrawing His supernatural protection. And no, He doesn't feel bad about it afterward. He simply waits for humans to repent and follow His ways before He leads them back into prosperity.

Did only Adam have to till the ground? Did only Eve have pain in childbirth? No! These curses were for all men and women.

 

[Simplelogic]

And again - there can be no evil, - if they have not eaten of the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of such - YET!


*

The knowledge of Evil is talking about practicing evil. This may come as a shock but God does not judge our thoughts, or read them. Our thoughts are where temptation and desire originate but YHVH judges us based off of our actions and our words….thats it! Evil temptation and desire was already there in the garden. Yet they didn't have the "knowledge" of evil until they practiced it with their actions.

 

[Sleeppy]

Eve absolutely knew that death was a negative thing. This is why the serpent said "you won't die". Obviously we are to conclude that the issue wasn't whether death was properly understood or not. That is nowhere in the text.

I have a 2 year old niece. She learned to associate the word "dead" with a death she'd witnessed on television. She is now capable of using the word accurately, to express certain avenues of her imagination. For example, she's threatened others with "dead", at times when she's felt threatened herself, or been reprimanded. I still wonder at the speed with which she accepted the association of the word with certain actions and states of being.

You might say she knows what death is. And I would understand that. After all, she's seen it, and can likely correctly identify it, even after one association. But, to say that she understands death, really knowing what death is, and how it affects herself and those around her, would be a huge mistake. It would be more accurate, completely accurate, to say that she knows death is a negative thing.

Telling her that she'd die, if she were to do something undesirable might not be an effective deterrent. I would not utilize that threat expecting complete obedience. -Knowing the consequences of an action is very important. Understanding the consequences of an action, is of utmost importance. Crucial elements of both knowledge and understanding are what Adam and Eve lacked. This lack was a function of their creation; they were not God, but only formed according to likeness.

 

[Kolibri]

I have a 2 year old niece. She learned to associate the word "dead" with a death she'd witnessed on television. She is now capable of using the word accurately, to express certain avenues of her imagination. For example, she's threatened others with "dead", at times when she's felt threatened herself, or been reprimanded. I still wonder at the speed with which she accepted the association of the word with certain actions and states of being.

You might say she knows what death is. And I would understand that. After all, she's seen it, and can likely correctly identify it, even after one association. But, to say that she understands death, really knowing what death is, and how it affects herself and those around her, would be a huge mistake. It would be more accurate, completely accurate, to say that she knows death is a negative thing.

Telling her that she'd die, if she were to do something undesirable might not be an effective deterrent. I would not utilize that threat expecting complete obedience. -Knowing the consequences of an action is very important. Understanding the consequences of an action, is of utmost importance. Crucial elements of both knowledge and understanding are what Adam and Eve lacked. This lack was a function of their creation; they were not God, but only formed according to likeness.

I agree, young ones quickly grasp things but may not grasp what it means to them personally. The difference between what God told Adam and what Eve told the serpent is interesting. She added the warning not to touch it. Why? It seems that perhaps Adam added the extra stipulation to create a sense of firmness.

The issue though was not of some defect on God's part. God is Love (1 John 4:8) and "the Rock, perfect is his activity, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness who is never unjust. Righteous and upright is he." (De 32:4) Jehovah even took into consideration that Eve truly was deceived. She believed that eating the fruit would benefit her in some way. Or she believed that she would cheat death. That is sad. She was already living with "exquisite delight in the abundance of peace." (Psalm 37:11b)

Where she failed was in showing love. What she really lacked was a healthy fear of displeasing her Abba, Father. "The fear of Jehovah is a training in wisdom." (Proverbs 15:33a) She failed to trust in Jehovah and go to him with her disquieting thoughts. "He satisfies the desire of those who fear him; He hears their cry for help, and he rescues them." (Psalm 145:19)

Remembering that Love and Justice are two of God's cardinal attributes, he would not have punished them for lacking the capacity to understand.
His standards of love and justice have not changed. (Malachi 3:6).

 

[tkdrocks]

In a very specific instance, I am going to agree with Simplelogic: God did not create evil. But that has nothing to do with any ancient texts. This falls more under the point that Evil doesn't actually exist. The concept of evil is a subjective point of view that people determine by their environment/upbringing/socialization/religion/teaching, etc. One group will tell you that Homosexuality = Evil. Another group calls drinking alcohol evil.

My point is that there is behavior that causes physical harm to others and other actions that do not.

What about murderers and child molesters? Aren't they evil? Well, these individuals do cause harm to others, so it makes sense to separate these people from society to prevent further harm. I guess you could group these people into a category called 'Evil', but that is more of a logical grouping than a thing called 'Evil'. To carry it further, you may need to cause harm to someone that is harming many to minimize the harm that they can cause. Causing harm to minimize harm may actually be considered 'Good'. (i.e. killing a terrorist before he can detonate a bomb that kills thousands of people).

It is hard to go down this path without starting a new thread on Objective Morality (which I do love discussing, by the way). But my larger point is that God did not create Evil, because 'Evil' doesn't, technically exist.

 

[Sleeppy]

Let me try to answer:

1) The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; A good understanding have all those who do His commandments; His praise endures forever. Psalm 111:10

So if Eve was seduced with the thought of becoming (even more) like God- did she fear, or revere God? Why or why not?

2) The desire usually comes from man wanting to attain wisdom apart from obeying God. Which is exactly what Eve did.

I understand why you would think that. But, Eve herself associates wisdom with God. The serpent tells her that she will become like God, and she calls that likeness wisdom.

What is wisdom useful for? Why did Eve want/need wisdom?

Does it make sense that Eve would eat a fruit God commanded her not to, so that she could inherit wisdom from God (from the tree He created)?

3) The absence of life

Is this accurate? If a person is dying, are they absent of life?

4 and 5) Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever " Gen 3:22

Man now understood what evil was. Death (separation from God) entered the world. God's goal was to have man live forever. Man brought separation from God into this world and God decided to block the Tree of life for mans benefit. He didn't want men to live forever in this separated state.

Adam and Eve were already separate from God; they were not dead. But even when you're dead, are you completely severed? Do the dead exist? If they had voices, perhaps like Abel, could they also claim "I am"?-- So perhaps you were being vague?

6) The Tree of life was not guarded until after man separated from God's presence. Once again, this act was to prevent men from living forever in a separated/fallen state. (Not the same concept as original sin btw)

It was God who separated prior to their disobedience. What effect did God's absence have on the entire situation? -- God also admits that Adam and Eve had become like Him, as to the knowledge of good and evil. This isn't an indication of separation, but of likeness. You have to ask and answer this question: Why are Adam and Eve being punished for becoming like God? If God has knowledge of evil, what does that mean?

7) Wonderful question. There was someone else in the garden!

13“You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The ruby, the topaz and the diamond;
The beryl, the onyx and the jasper;
The lapis lazuli, the turquoise and the emerald;
And the gold, the workmanship of your settings and sockets,
Was in you.
On the day that you were created
They were prepared.

14“You were the anointed cherub who covers,
And I placed you there.
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked in the midst of the stones of fire.

15“You were blameless in your ways
From the day you were created
Until unrighteousness was found in you. Ezekiel 28: 13-15

8)I believe he was the covering Cherub who either appeared as the serpent or convinced the serpent. The goal was authority over the earth. Man was given authority over this creation by God Himself. Man owned the world technically….not God! Man ended up handing over the title deed to this world to that Cherub who deceived.

So then the question becomes: why place Ezekiel 28: 13-15 thousands of years away from the Eden event, in the midst of a story about the King of Tyre?

Why omit verse 12?

Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre and say to him, So said the Lord God: You are the one who engraves images, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

And why would the serpent, or the Cherub, want authority over the Earth?

 

[Sleeppy]

I agree, young ones quickly grasp things but may not grasp what it means to them personally. The difference between what God told Adam and what Eve told the serpent is interesting. She added the warning not to touch it. Why? It seems that perhaps Adam added the extra stipulation to create a sense of firmness.

That is very interesting.

The issue though was not of some defect on God's part. God is Love (1 John 4:8) and "the Rock, perfect is his activity, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness who is never unjust. Righteous and upright is he." (De 32:4) Jehovah even took into consideration that Eve truly was deceived. She believed that eating the fruit would benefit her in some way. Or she believed that she would cheat death. That is sad. She was already living with "exquisite delight in the abundance of peace." (Psalm 37:11b)

I would agree with you, that God has no defect, if we were actually talking about God. In this case, I think you're misidentifying Him. In this story, and in others throughout the Tanakh, God makes mistakes and repents- like humans do. In other words, He acts defectively. Quoting statements which say that God is this and that, aren't supporting your argument. To support your argument about an "eternal" God, you would need to cite current events. Correct? Or in the least, events which are readily observable as being accurate.

If Eve acted out of ignorance, is she accountable according to the Law?-- Why would someone who has "exquisite delight, in the abundance of peace" want wisdom? It doesn't make sense. If you are standing in front of a river and become thirsty, do you look for more water? Are you saying Eve was looking for more water, in the abundance of it?

Where she failed was in showing love. What she really lacked was a healthy fear of displeasing her Abba, Father. "The fear of Jehovah is a training in wisdom." (Proverbs 15:33a) She failed to trust in Jehovah and go to him with her disquieting thoughts. "He satisfies the desire of those who fear him; He hears their cry for help, and he rescues them." (Psalm 145:19)

How is trust gained? Do you trust gravity? How is it that Eve trusted gravity more than she trusted God? Why was there a break in trust?

Remembering that Love and Justice are two of God's cardinal attributes, he would not have punished them for lacking the capacity to understand.
His standards of love and justice have not changed. (Malachi 3:6).

But in this case, He did punish them for lacking understanding. There's no way around this fact.

 

[Simplelogic]

So if Eve was seduced with the thought of becoming (even more) like God- did she fear, or revere God? Why or why not?



I understand why you would think that. But, Eve herself associates wisdom with God. The serpent tells her that she will become like God, and she calls that likeness wisdom.

What is wisdom useful for? Why did Eve want/need wisdom?

Does it make sense that Eve would eat a fruit God commanded her not to, so that she could inherit wisdom from God (from the tree He created)?



Is this accurate? If a person is dying, are they absent of life?



Adam and Eve were already separate from God; they were not dead. But even when you're dead, are you completely severed? Do the dead exist? If they had voices, perhaps like Abel, could they also claim "I am"?-- So perhaps you were being vague?



It was God who separated prior to their disobedience. What effect did God's absence have on the entire situation? -- God also admits that Adam and Eve had become like Him, as to the knowledge of good and evil. This isn't an indication of separation, but of likeness. You have to ask and answer this question: Why are Adam and Eve being punished for becoming like God? If God has knowledge of evil, what does that mean?



So then the question becomes: why place Ezekiel 28: 13-15 thousands of years away from the Eden event, in the midst of a story about the King of Tyre?

Why omit verse 12?

Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre and say to him, So said the Lord God: You are the one who engraves images, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

And why would the serpent, or the Cherub, want authority over the Earth?

A lot of material in here to cover. I am not trying to be vague in my responses, just so you know. Just a little pressed for time.

I will say, regarding Ezekiel, that dualistic contrast is a common function in Hebrew poetry. There are many verses which Christians have taken and run with. (Most of them by Paul). Where people reinterpret the Hebrew text to say something completely different. This is NOT one of those cases imho. There is a clear subject change from the King of Tyre to a completely different being. The king of Tyre's actions and spirit are being contrasted with the covering Cherub who was "in the garden". I have heard numerous Jewish commentaries on this passage and none logically adequate for my liking.

If this was ONLY about the king of Tyre then:

-Why claim that the king of Tyre was in eden? (even in a poetic sense?)
-Why label him as a "covering Cherub"?
-Why claim that he was once "blameless"? Was the king of Tyre ever remotely close to being blameless in God's eyes?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Many even go so far as to say God created evil!

I thought God created everything, but then I can't be expected to keep up with these permutations.

 

[Kolibri]

Ge 3:22 -

Evidently, Adam and Eve got to know what was good and what was bad in the special sense of now judging for themselves what was good and what was bad.

 

[Sleeppy]

A lot of material in here to cover. I am not trying to be vague in my responses, just so you know. Just a little pressed for time.

I will say, regarding Ezekiel, that dualistic contrast is a common function in Hebrew poetry. There are many verses which Christians have taken and run with. (Most of them by Paul). Where people reinterpret the Hebrew text to say something completely different. This is NOT one of those cases imho. There is a clear subject change from the King of Tyre to a completely different being. The king of Tyre's actions and spirit are being contrasted with the covering Cherub who was "in the garden". I have heard numerous Jewish commentaries on this passage and none logically adequate for my liking.

If this was ONLY about the king of Tyre then:

-Why claim that the king of Tyre was in eden? (even in a poetic sense?)
-Why label him as a "covering Cherub"?
-Why claim that he was once "blameless"? Was the king of Tyre ever remotely close to being blameless in God's eyes?

You acknowledge that it was about the king of Tyre, but then you ask these questions, as if even poetically it had nothing to do with Tyre. God specifically asks Ezekiel to talk about the king of Tyre, and the following verses do that. Why question in this manner?

Ezekiel - Chapter 28 - OU Torah

I don't know the entire history, but this made a lot of sense.

 

[Sleeppy]

Ge 3:22 -

Evidently, Adam and Eve got to know what was good and what was bad in the special sense of now judging for themselves what was good and what was bad.

And we do this to this day.. I would also count that as evidence of what the Eden story is trying to represent.

 

[WALL]

I have seen numerous posts lately which claim that God is responsible for evil and suffering on earth.

God is not running things down here ......yet

LUKE 4 [5] And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. [6] And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. [7] If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine. [8] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

So.. How and why does satan offer JESUS the kingdoms of the world? Who’s kingdoms are they?

JOHN 14 [30] Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. [31] But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.

And who is the prince of this world?

REV. 12 [7] And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, [8] And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. [9] And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

And who was cast out of heaven? And who decieves the whole world?

2 COR. 4 [1] Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; [2] But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. [3] But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: [4] In whom THE GOD OF THIS WORLD hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Whose the god of this world?

REV.11 [15] And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

As i said at the 1st. Gods not running things here ...yet! But He will be someday

 

[Kolibri]

For the following I would say that Jehovah does not make mistakes. It is the change in people's attitude toward his righteous standards that changes how he feels.
A Repentant God?
M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia comments: “God himself is said to repent [na·cham′, feel regret]; but this can only be understood of his altering his conduct towards his creatures, either in the bestowing of good or infliction of evil—which change in the divine conduct is founded on a change in his creatures; and thus, speaking after the manner of men, God is said to repent.” (1894, Vol. VIII, p. 1042) God’s righteous standards remain constant, stable, unchanging, free from fluctuation. (Mal 3:6; Jas 1:17) No circumstance can cause him to change his mind about these, to turn from them, or to abandon them. However, the attitude and reactions of his intelligent creatures toward those perfect standards and toward God’s application of them can be good or bad. If good, this is pleasing to God; if bad, it causes regret. Moreover, the creature’s attitude can change from good to bad or bad to good, and since God does not change his standards to accommodate them, his pleasure (and accompanying blessings) can accordingly change to regret (and accompanying discipline or punishment) or vice versa. His judgments and decisions, then, are totally free from caprice, fickleness, unreliability, or error; hence he is free from all erratic or eccentric conduct.—Eze 18:21-30; 33:7-20.
----
In the same way God can “feel regret” and ‘turn back’ from carrying out some punishment when his warning of such action produces a change in attitude and conduct on the part of the offenders. (De 13:17; Ps 90:13) They have returned to him and he ‘returns’ to them. (Zec 8:3; Mal 3:7) Instead of being ‘pained,’ he now rejoices, for he finds no delight in bringing death to sinners. (Lu 15:10; Eze 18:32) While never shifting away from his righteous standards, God extends help so that persons can return to him; they are encouraged to do so. He kindly invites them to return, ‘spreading out his hands’ and saying by means of his representatives, “Turn back, please, . . . that I may not cause calamity to you,” “Do not do, please, this detestable sort of thing that I have hated.” (Isa 65:1, 2; Jer 25:5, 6; 44:4, 5) He gives ample time for change (Ne 9:30; compare Re 2:20-23) and shows great patience and forbearance, since “he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.” (2Pe 3:8, 9; Ro 2:4, 5) On occasion he kindly saw to it that his message was accompanied by powerful works, or miracles, that established the divine commission of his messengers and helped strengthen faith in those hearing. (Ac 9:32-35) When his message receives no response, he employs discipline; he withdraws his favor and protection, thereby allowing the unrepentant ones to undergo privations, famine, suffering of oppression from their enemies. This may bring them to their senses, may restore their proper fear of God, or may cause them to realize that their course was stupid and that their set of values was wrong.—2Ch 33:10-13; Ne 9:28, 29; Am 4:6-11.

However, his patience has its limits, and when these are reached he gets “tired of feeling regret”; then his decision to render punishment is unchangeable. (Jer 15:6, 7; 23:19, 20; Le 26:14-33) He is no longer merely “thinking” or “forming” against such ones a calamity (Jer 18:11; 26:3-6) but has reached an irreversible decision.—2Ki 23:24-27; Isa 43:13; Jer 4:28; Zep 3:8; Re 11:17, 18.
- Repentance — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

 

[Sleeppy]

Did only Adam have to till the ground? Did only Eve have pain in childbirth? No! These curses were for all men and women.

This takes us back to the idea behind "original sin".