How Do Christians Reconcile The Following Question Regarding Their Faith?

[Buttercup]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

That's a good question. My understanding is like a mother and child. When a mother gives birth, she is not expecting her child to be a murderer. The child is not a murderer until he actually kills someone with intent to kill. Basically the mother created a perfect child and because of his enviornment (hopefully not psychological and/or upbringing), he had some motivation to take a life.

It isn't the mother's fault; because, she didn't give him the gun. That's how I hear justifications from believers.

On the other hand, putting the tree in the garden is like putting the gun in the child's presence. If another child came up to him and said "don't worry, your mom says its okay to play with this toy" and the other child doesn't know what the toy is no matter if he was told not to touch it or not, of course he shouldn't be punished for his lack of knowledge.

If anything, the only punishment would be if the child used the gun and it harmed someone. The gun shouldn't be there in the first place.

However, I think believers are coming from the mother-child perspective rather than the gun perspective. Guess we'll wait to see if any believers will add to the convo.

 

[McBell]

I fail to understand how your mother-child analogy applies.
The mother did not create the child in the same manner as god created people...
The mother is not all knowing and all powerful...

 

[Deathbydefault]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

Formally being one of those that believed in such a thing you should have an understanding of the common response to the question you are asking.
That being something along the lines of "everything is just a test, didn't ya know?!".

Bleh.

 

[Deathbydefault]

I fail to understand how your mother-child analogy applies.
The mother did not create the child in the same manner as god created people...
The mother is not all knowing and all powerful...

The mother gives a child a gun knowing that the child will go off and kill other people with it.
God creates human beings knowing that in the future they will rape and/or murder others.

How does this analogy not make sense? It's vastly scaled down as well.

 

[McBell]

The mother gives a child a gun knowing that the child will go off and kill other people with it.
God creates human beings knowing that in the future they will rape and/or murder others.

How does this analogy not make sense? It's vastly scaled down as well.

In what post did the mother give the child a gun?

 

[Deathbydefault]

In what post did the mother give the child a gun?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide.

 

[Buttercup]

That's a good question. My understanding is like a mother and child. When a mother gives birth, she is not expecting her child to be a murderer. The child is not a murderer until he actually kills someone with intent to kill. Basically the mother created a perfect child and because of his enviornment (hopefully not psychological and/or upbringing), he had some motivation to take a life.

It isn't the mother's fault; because, she didn't give him the gun. That's how I hear justifications from believers.

I understand what you're saying as I've heard arguments similar to this usually regarding the concept of free will. You're basically saying the child had choice in the matter of committing murder. However, God purposefully designed a human to murder, it wasn't an accident. Not only that, he KNEW this person would commit murder because he's all knowing. Do you see the difference?

 

[McBell]

Ah.
I was replying to Carlita's post.
Sorry for the confusion

 

[Deathbydefault]

It's all good, more my fault than yours.
Should I delete my replies to you?

 

[McBell]

It's all good,

Agreed

more my fault than yours.

Disagree.
I should have quoted Carlita's post before I replied.

Should I delete my replies to you?

No need to really.
Besides, it may help others learn from my mistake of not quoting Carlita's post in my post.

 

[Thana]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

Held accountable? How silly.
God made us. He made the world. So who, exactly, would God be accountable too? You?
The problem with questions like these is you automatically assume you have the moral high-ground, but you don't.

 

[Mindmaster]

I think we have to understand that there is more than one type of rapist or murderer. There are those that are psychotic and those who are just cruel or conditioned into that response. One is just a broken human, and the other is was taught that behaving this way was somehow acceptable. We can fix the latter with therapy and reprogramming, while the person with the broken brain is just fulfilling its nature like an animal. In the last case, placing any association of morality to it is foolhardy -- it is just as unfair to judge a broken person as anything but handicapped in some manner.

We have a culture which encourages everyone to behave like a slightly more cognizant chimpanzee and you're wondering why people are raped? It's not that we can't do better -- it's that these parts of our being are very old and rape or murder is common between all primates. Only humans, in some way, have the ability to somewhat minimize this.

If there is a God, he gave a choice. A choice to be like a God, or be like a monkey...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I understand what you're saying as I've heard arguments similar to this usually regarding the concept of free will. You're basically saying the child had choice in the matter of committing murder. However, God purposefully designed a human to murder, it wasn't an accident. Not only that, he KNEW this person would commit murder because he's all knowing. Do you see the difference?

Do you think that maybe God should have created a human that cannot be tempted?

 

[Deathbydefault]

Held accountable? How silly.
God made us. He made the world. So who, exactly, would God be accountable too? You?
The problem with questions like these is you automatically assume you have the moral high-ground, but you don't.

Moral high-ground? Is that something that only an all powerful being can wield because it can force anyone and anything to do what it pleases?
Sounds more like an abuse of power.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I fail to understand how your mother-child analogy applies.
The mother did not create the child in the same manner as god created people...
The mother is not all knowing and all powerful...

The second one, the point was that the mother (and father) created the child. It wasn't meant to be the same as how god created humans. The point is that both of them did not create a human to murder someone.

However, they both did create a human (by however means) with the intent to murder.

The sad difference is, the mother thankfully did not intent to create a child to murder. She just created the child with the temptation. She didn't know.

God knew he created a child with the temptation to murder. He knew and she didn't. But that doesn't mean the child did not have temptation based on who created that child and the nature of the person (human or god) that created it.

In other words, regardless if it was a human who created the child or god, for some reason the temptation is there. I would not blame it on the mother, because she didn't know. However, god knew about this temptation.

It's not the temptation to sin that's the problem. It's that god knew he created that human. My question is why would he create a human who can be tempted?

Was it supposed to be a good thing?

A mother would never put a gun near a child yet god put a "gun" (the tree) and let satan/the snake tempt the child (in mind). I see why the OP is asking this; can this be answered?

 

[McBell]

Held accountable? How silly.
God made us. He made the world. So who, exactly, would God be accountable too? You?
The problem with questions like these is you automatically assume you have the moral high-ground, but you don't.

So God gets a free pass?
Or is it to say that God is not to be held to his own standards?
So much for leading by example, eh?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In what post did the mother give the child a gun?

He makes a good point. Pretend that she did. What makes god's decision to put the tree in the garden much better than a mother giving a gun to the child? Remember, satan/the snake didn't give the gun. He just tempted the child. But god was the one that created that temptation to sin. I can understand why god would be to blame as with the mother.

 

[McBell]

He makes a good point. Pretend that she did. What makes god's decision to put the tree in the garden much better than a mother giving a gun to the child? Remember, satan/the snake didn't give the gun. He just tempted the child. But god was the one that created that temptation to sin. I can understand why god would be to blame as with the mother.

I am not in disagreement with the OP.
I just fail to see how the analogy alteration applies given the mother is not all knowing, not all powerful and did not create the child from dust and breath.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I am not in disagreement with the OP.
I just fail to see how the analogy alteration applies given the mother is not all knowing, not all powerful and did not create the child from dust and breath.

The only similarity is they both created a child with the temptation to murder. The difference is god knew who he created and his nature. The mother did not. So, I can see why god would be to blame. I see the difference in the analogy, and would never blame the mother, though.

That's like if I knew when I create a child, I know he would be tempted to murder. Even if I decide to create the child anyway, why would I put anything in his presence for him to go through with that temptation? Also, why would I let anyone in our home that can influence my child to take that gun?

The mother is innocent because she doesn't know.

God, on the other hand, new. So...