Is a Suboptimal World a Problem?

[whag]

Okay.

Okay, let's talk more about the teleology of the earth, then.

No idea what you mean here. Man is given the gift to be like God Himself?

If God is totally unselfish (truly Loving) than God would be doing and allowing everything to happen that would help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective, so this world is really arranged to help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective.

I'm not really sure what you mean here. I don't see how the world is arranged to help willing individuals fulfill a grand objective. Explain your particular objective so I have an idea of what you're talking about.


You lost me. I never suggested that God create a different kind of world but have only observed that sin is part of the teleology that enables the ultimate world.

Does an impossibility keep God from making man into a God like person at his creation, realize that a God is a totally unselfish being (Love itself), that would mean making a totally Loving person, but Godly type Love is not an instinctive type Love (a robotic type love), but it has to be part of an autonomous free will choice (the decision of the individual with this Love). God could not force this love on an individual (like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun), so how can the individual obtain such a Love. This Love is way too great for humans to learn, develop, earn, deserve or ever pay back.

God essentially forces that love on children and retarded people. Free will has nothing to do with their salvation in your view, so obviously it's possible to have a shotgun wedding of sorts. Heaven will be populated with many such souls.


This is a very odd apologia: to suggest that God eternally tortures people because they'd be unhappy in Heaven isn't a persuasive argument.

I think you've completely misapprehended the OP. The OP observes that sin was part of the teleology. This is rarely acknowledged in Christianity (maybe it is in some esoteric versions of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy). Most conservative protestant Christians believe Adam and resulting generations could take a fork in the road called "Be Perfect." Sparko has wisely acknowledged they couldn't and such a world was never sustainable. The Bible implies that human beings could have behaved perfectly forever.

[37818]

Strange given that the design depended on the expression of anthropological imperfection. Or do you think that Adam and resulting generations could have taken the "Be Perfect" fork in the road and maintained that perfection indefinitely?

It has been presumed that had the serpent entity not deceived Eve and Adam did his task to keep the garden - then yes it is conceivable. But with it in mind that the lake of fire (Revelation 21:8) which was prepared beforehand (Matthew 25:41; Revelation 12:9) was part of God's plan for one who posed as a serpent. God in this made it possible for all men to be saved (Titus 2:11). God knew not all would though (Romans 3:11). There is going to be the new heaven and earth (Revelation 21:1) which was the ultimate plan all along.

What is meant there by holiness 37818? Is anyone holy prior to death? Christianity says no. Ask Sparko, holiness is given as a charity from god to the sinful in the afterlife so long as they believe and want it.

Holiness is a matter of understanding what the will of God is (Proverbs 9:10; Matthew 7:21). And while you may not understand it correctly - I presume Sparko would agree that righteousness - holiness is what God gives those whom God saves. ". . . For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." -- 2 Corinthians 5:21.

[bling]

No idea what you mean here. Man is given the gift to be like God Himself?

I'm not really sure what you mean here. I don't see how the world is arranged to help willing individuals fulfill a grand objective. Explain your particular objective so I have an idea of what you're talking about.

You lost me. I never suggested that God create a different kind of world but have only observed that sin is part of the teleology that enables the ultimate world.

God essentially forces that love on children and retarded people. Free will has nothing to do with their salvation in your view, so obviously it's possible to have a shotgun wedding of sorts. Heaven will be populated with many such souls.

No, Children and retarded people are not saved but are in a safe condition, except they do not have Godly type Love , but do have naturally a wonderful child for parent type love. They enter heaven with the less type of love, but are Loved by others with Godly type Love.

This is a very odd apologia: to suggest that God eternally tortures people because they'd be unhappy in Heaven isn't a persuasive argument.

I think you've completely misapprehended the OP. The OP observes that sin was part of the teleology. This is rarely acknowledged in Christianity (maybe it is in some esoteric versions of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy). Most conservative protestant Christians believe Adam and resulting generations could take a fork in the road called "Be Perfect." Sparko has wisely acknowledged they couldn't and such a world was never sustainable. The Bible implies that human beings could have behaved perfectly forever.

[whag]

It has been presumed that had the serpent entity not deceived Eve and Adam did his task to keep the garden - then yes it is conceivable. .

Why would you presume a hypothetical situation in which the serpent is inactive in tempting? We see that Satan would be a relentless tempter, going after Adam's kids and so on. Therefore it's not conceivable, even in the literal context.

The concept of two of the first people not even having the experience of being raised by parents is odd. The truth is that there was no "first couple" formed from the dust, without parents. Instead, there's a lineal chain of mammals and a blurred line between our transition from the wild. This is why territoriality and war is such an ingrained feature in humanity, expressed very early in our history. It's the leftover stuff of our primal heritage, and that's why we laugh at saber ratllers and xenophobes.

[bling]

If man can not achieve what god expects of them here on earth, if in the end a christ like nature still has to be bestowed upon man as a charity, then god could have bestowed it upon them in the first place. Free will has nothing to do with it. There are two choices according to christianity, heaven or hell. Put those two choices to anyone and I can assure you, no one is going to choose hell.

[bling]

That could be. I still don't buy that the debt caused by sin is unbelievably huge, though.

I for a long time felt very similarly.

Very Briefly:

1. What I have come to believe from my personal study and life experiences, this messed up world is not the fault of God, satan, bad luck, Adam & Eve or bad people that have lived before me. The problem is me. I quench my indwelling Holy Spirit. I have seen what He can do, but stop short of allowing Him to do it through me.

2. I am personally responsible for Christ being tortured humiliated and murdered on the cross.
That takes lot of explaining and time.

[whag]

I for a long time felt very similarly.

Very Briefly:

1. What I have come to believe from my personal study and life experiences, this messed up world is not the fault of God, satan, bad luck, Adam & Eve or bad people that have lived before me. The problem is me. I quench my indwelling Holy Spirit. I have seen what He can do, but stop short of allowing Him to do it through me.

2. I am personally responsible for Christ being tortured humiliated and murdered on the cross.
That takes lot of explaining and time.

I see number 2 repeated a lot in Christian circles, but i don't believe the people who say it really believe it. It's even worse than saying you'd torture and humiliate someone today. I don't believe you would. Back then, torturing someone to death apart from a legal punitive setting was even more taboo than it is today.

[37818]

Why would you presume a hypothetical situation in which the serpent is inactive in tempting? We see that Satan would be a relentless tempter, going after Adam's kids and so on. Therefore it's not conceivable, even in the literal context.

Not if there was no tempter.

The concept of two of the first people not even having the experience of being raised by parents is odd. The truth is that there was no "first couple" formed from the dust, without parents. Instead, there's a lineal chain of mammals and a blurred line between our transition from the wild. This is why territoriality and war is such an ingrained feature in humanity, expressed very early in our history. It's the leftover stuff of our primal heritage, and that's why we laugh at saber ratllers and xenophobes.

Well that is your view. Humans have 23 chromosome pairs. Other primates have 24.

[whag]

Not if there was no tempter.

Even without a tempter, human beings would eventually express their imperfection. We possess the equipment of our mammalian ancestors, meaning we're violent and have a much bigger sexual drive than needed. I know you don't believe that, but it's true.

That you presume we could have behaved perfectly forever isn't realistic. Heck, even bad thoughts are considered a sin to God. How long do you imagine human beings could last without a violent or sexual thought?

Well that is your view. Humans have 23 chromosome pairs. Other primates have 24.

No, it's the epistemically responsible view. First, we ARE primates. Second, those "missing" chromosomes were predicted to have fused at some point in our evolution. In 2005, this prediction was confirmed:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome_2_(human)

[37818]

Even without a tempter, human beings would eventually express their imperfection. We possess the equipment of our mammalian ancestors, meaning we're violent and have a much bigger sexual drive than needed. I know you don't believe that, but it's true.

That you presume we could have behaved perfectly forever isn't realistic. Heck, even bad thoughts are considered a sin to God. How long do you imagine human beings could last without a violent or sexual thought?

This understanding you give is void of the concept of the knowledge of good and evil being obtained.

No, it's the epistemically responsible view. First, we ARE primates. Second, those "missing" chromosomes were predicted to have fused at some point in our evolution. In 2005, this prediction was confirmed:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome_2_(human)

The concept is explained. But can you elaborate what constitutes the proof there that this happened with the human chromosomes and was not original to the human chromosome set? How do we know that?

[whag]

This understanding you give is void of the concept of the knowledge of good and evil being obtained.

Which is exactly my point in the OP. It was never a possibility that knowledge wouldn't be obtained given our make up and the environment we find ourselves in.

The concept is explained. But can you elaborate what constitutes the proof there that this happened with the human chromosomes and was not original to the human chromosome set? How do we know that?

Because the fusion of the telomeres is unmistakable. We can literally see where they joined.

Few things are more sad than a theist who doesn't know what he is. You should be ashamed that you fight this reality so hard. I really disrespect you for this.

[Sparko]

I see number 2 repeated a lot in Christian circles, but i don't believe the people who say it really believe it. It's even worse than saying you'd torture and humiliate someone today. I don't believe you would. Back then, torturing someone to death apart from a legal punitive setting was even more taboo than it is today.

What it means is that Jesus gave his life as a sacrifice for our sins. Every one of us. That means our actions and sins are WHY Jesus had to die, and each of us contributed to that death, making us responsible. Without our sins, Jesus would not have had to suffer and die.

[37818]

Which is exactly my point in the OP. It was never a possibility that knowledge wouldn't be obtained given our make up and the environment we find ourselves in.

So either mankind is sinless, which it is not. Or mankind has knowledge of good and evil.

Because the fusion of the telomeres is unmistakable. We can literally see where they joined.

Few things are more sad than a theist who doesn't know what he is. You should be ashamed that you fight this reality so hard. I really disrespect you for this.

Oh. So you rule out that I have some understanding of what is true and not true. Either something believed is true. Or what is believed is not true. How hard is that?

The odds are what we think we know is true is probably false. Especially given permutation and combinations of true and false things. Now we choose to believe different things, but not without reasons. The reasons may be bad - leading to false beliefs and ideas.

If theistic evolution is true then even though I currently do not hold that view - I would be fine with that. Ignorance can be fixed - but it has been said - stupidity is forever. So pardon my ignorance - I am interested in what is really true (Proverbs 21:30).

[whag]

So either mankind is sinless, which it is not. Or mankind has knowledge of good and evil.

Oh. So you rule out that I have some understanding of what is true and not true. Either something believed is true. Or what is believed is not true. How hard is that?

The odds are what we think we know is true is probably false. Especially given permutation and combinations of true and false things. Now we choose to believe different things, but not without reasons. The reasons may be bad - leading to false beliefs and ideas.

If theistic evolution is true then even though I currently do not hold that view - I would be fine with that. Ignorance can be fixed - but it has been said - stupidity is forever. So pardon my ignorance - I am interested in what is really true (Proverbs 21:30).

If you were interested in what was really true, you wouldn't fight the genomic evidence of your primate lineage. You thought you had a brilliant point about chromosomes without even realizing that issue was settled more than a decade ago. Please stop participating in this thread.

[Sparko]

If you were interested in what was really true, you wouldn't fight the genomic evidence of your primate lineage. You thought you had a brilliant point about chromosomes without even realizing that issue was settled more than a decade ago. Please stop participating in this thread.

whag, we allow people to control thread participation, but you can't just arbitrarily kick people out because you don't like their arguments. If they are not being disruptive, and are on topic, and you don't have some major history with them (like beagle and jorge) you can't just kick them out - you can however eliminate certain posters from your thread if you announce it in the OP when you start the thread.