If Man Obeyed God

[thomas t]

Can't view it and not going to create an account to do so. Anything not so restricted that says same?

didn't find anything.

Anyway - the story in the vid is a depiction of what the author thinks would have happened if Adam obeyed - under the assumption that Genesis is true.
Adam was told by the snake how to procreate and the earth ended up being horribly overpopulated. Adam still living thousands of years after.

What's the video called?

I can't view it here since it's aged restricted only on youtube

It is called "If Man Obeyed God" (like the title of this thread actually)
Thomas

 

[thomas t]

So how is the video wrong about the Christian paradigm then?

in my opinion, they are mistaken thinking that God needed sin for his creation to work properly - without overpopulation.

 

[SalixIncendium]

in my opinion, they are mistaken in thinking that God needed death for his creation to work properly - without overpopulation.

If you were God decided that the world didn't need death, how would you manage overpopulation?

We already have this a dilemma with death, as there are more births than deaths, and the world population continues to increase despite finite resources.

 

[thomas t]

If you were God decided that the world didn't need death, how would you manage overpopulation?

We already have this a dilemma with death, as there are more births than deaths, and the world population continues to increase despite finite resources.

That's a very good question.
I don't know.
I trust God the almighty to be able to have come up with some solution to it.

 

[SalixIncendium]

That's a very good question.
I don't know.
I trust God the almighty to be able to have come up with some solution to it.

So why didn't he? Why did he choose sin and subsequently death?

 

[thomas t]

So why didn't he? Why did he choose sin and subsequently death?

no idea, either.
"Choose" death - let me put it that way: man had a fair opportunity to not sin. Sin was man's+woman's decision, as I see it.

 

[Audie]

I have seen it before and find it rather naive.

A naive video on one pov does not exactly represent the thinking of every atheist!

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is a popular video on Youtube. (From my research, it is actually the most popular atheist one...)

It says: man's design, as for instance the immune system, suggests that he can die. However, death is mentioned in the BIble only after the original sin took place. So the video says, sin was somewhat needed for God's design to work in the world.

Yes - this is an implication that's consistent with the position of many creationists.

My stance to this:
There is no reason to believe that God did not change genetics after the episode in the garden.
For example, such a change is indicated by Genesis 6:3.

So you think that death didn't enter the world as a consequence of Adam & Eve eating from the tree of knowledge of good & evil, but through a deliberate decision by God to introduce death to the world?

Seems to me that God comes off even worse in your version.

I also believe that God certainly would have figured out a way how to deal with overpopulation in case they wouldn't have sinned in the first place.

If God would have had to "figure out a way how to deal with" a problem with his design, then his original design was imperfect. A perfect designer's designs don't need fixing or tweaking.

Again: your position reflects poorly on your God.

 

[Mock Turtle]

didn't find anything.

Anyway - the story in the vid is a depiction of what the author thinks would have happened if Adam obeyed - under the assumption that Genesis is true.
Adam was told by the snake how to procreate and the earth ended up being horribly overpopulated. Adam still living thousands of years after.


It is called "If Man Obeyed God" (like the title of this thread actually)
Thomas

Well I doubt viewing it would have changed my mind - as to the Bible being that relevant (about our origins and such) and coming from God, so it hardly matters I suppose.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The video assumes the there was no death until the original sin, which is a belief that does not exist in the atheist paradigm (not to mention belief in God). So asking an atheist if it's reasonable is futile.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

- Aristotle

 

[thomas t]

So you think that death didn't enter the world as a consequence of Adam & Eve eating from the tree of knowledge of good & evil, but through a deliberate decision by God to introduce death to the world?

no no, I do hold that death entered the world as a consequence of that sin.

If God would have had to "figure out a way how to deal with" a problem with his design, then his original design was imperfect.

It wasn't a problem to begin with, I think.
I'm sure God would have come up with a solution to deal with potential overpopulation. Potentially before it even happened, in my view.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

no no, I do hold that sin entered the world as a consequence of that sin.

I'm not sure I know what you're trying to say here.

It wasn't a problem to begin with, I think.
I'm sure God would have come up with a solution to deal with potential overpopulation. Potentially before it even happened, in my view.

... but God couldn't come up with a solution to the problem of original sin?

... or did God not see original sin as a problem?

 

[thomas t]

I'm not sure I know what you're trying to say here.

In my opinion, death entered the world only after the original sin. Ah sorry, it was a typo. I am going to correct it.

God provided the solution in Jesus Christ, in my opinion. In a sense that anyone who accepts his atoning sacrifice... will achieve eternal life.

 

[Windwalker]

Oh the joys of debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. If we are going to insist in interpreting Genesis as a factual scientific account of creation, then the answer is simple. God placed in a failsafe mechanism in creation that never experienced death. We never saw that happen, because death rendered that failsafe unnecessary.

That failsafe was that once the population ratio of organisms to the habitable environment reached a point where it would begin to overwhelm the system, the inactive gene of infertility would kick in species wide, and there would no longer be any reproduction. Problem solved. Genesis can remain scientifically valid now, and faith can rest undisturbed by such dilemmas .

 

[stvdv]

This is a popular video on Youtube. (From my research, it is actually the most popular atheist one...)

Below is just my opinion

I really don't like this video

It says: man's design, as for instance the immune system, suggests that he can die. However, death is mentioned in the BIble only after the original sin took place. So the video says, sin was somewhat needed for God's design to work in the world.

For me there is no inconsistency in Genesis story. Makes all perfect sense, just symbolizes duality verses non-duality

My stance to this:
There is no reason to believe that God did not change genetics after the episode in the garden.
For example, such a change is indicated by Genesis 6:3.

I don't see this as God interfering or changing genetics; just stating some facts

I also believe that God certainly would have figured out a way how to deal with overpopulation in case they wouldn't have sinned in the first place.

From my POV things as overpopulation easily solve themselves; no God-intervention needed for that. 1 strong virus will do the trick or A-bomb etc.

 

[Clara Tea]

The bible says that some lived longer than modern humans (Methuselah, Noah, et al). However, archaeologists haven't found long-lived human remains, and they generally can determine age.

Many parts of the bible might be wrong.

If so, it throws into doubt the existence of God, since the only thing that we know of God is written in the bible.

So, should we believe all parts of the bible? Jonah lived in the belly of a whale?

 

[thomas t]

The bible says that some lived longer than modern humans (Methuselah, Noah, et al). However, archaeologists haven't found long-lived human remains, and they generally can determine age.

Many parts of the bible might be wrong.

I still believe all of the Bible is true.
2 Peter 3:5-6 says that this isn't the earth that Methuselah used to live on. The old one was destroyed. If it's destroyed it's questionable if we find the remnants of the people that used to live on it, to begin with.

Thomas

 

[firedragon]

This is a popular video on Youtube. (From my research, it is actually the most popular atheist one...)

It says: man's design, as for instance the immune system, suggests that he can die. However, death is mentioned in the BIble only after the original sin took place. So the video says, sin was somewhat needed for God's design to work in the world.

My stance to this:
There is no reason to believe that God did not change genetics after the episode in the garden.
For example, such a change is indicated by Genesis 6:3.

I also believe that God certainly would have figured out a way how to deal with overpopulation in case they wouldn't have sinned in the first place.

This death is a spiritual death and is known in the Tanakh. As in Ezekiel where it says "The person who sins, it is he who shall die". And it is the person who is judged according to his righteousness or wickedness. This "die" is a spiritual death, not a physical death. Thats why Ezekiel says "

Thus the concern that you had raised about dying if you sin only was originally raised by those who dont know the Bible.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Hello. I am not an atheist. Who cares what soon to be fried fish think? Just enjoy how they open and close their mouths and swim around for a while.

If you saw this thing as a contradiction, you might have a problem with it, but you don't see it as a contradiction, and are a Christian in whatever way you are because you are probably least troubled with it, satisfied by what you believe, understand, and practice, and so are not seeking anything else.

You are annoyed perhaps by people being hostile towards or denigrating things you like and believe in or the way you believe in such things, so you try to make it a little better by making a response.

All you are doing is trying to feel good in a lasting way, hoping that it will lead to an everlasting good as well.

The atheist most commonly (I think likely the majority but maybe not all people identifying as atheists) do not have your hope, their life (according to what most seem to believe and state) ends when they die here and their body and organs stop functioning and they are medically dead.

You have a belief which extends you existence and gives you a hope for more good and spiritual bliss and pleasure. Even in this life, you have a friend and a helper you can turn to, talk to, and are never alone, you can even pray for things, even pray for peace in yourself.

The atheists generally do not utilize any such techniques or take advantage of such, and find it difficult to suspend their disbelief enough to actually make an effort to try such things or experience any appearance of such working.

Doesn't that sound depressing and miserable, and how you have the advantage in every way imaginable against these walking dead people?

They have no God, no belief in supernatural help or friend, they have no future really except the pitiful things of this temporary existence concluding in the loss of their bodily functions, death, and the destruction if their appearance, functionality, and bodies.

To say these things about God, or Life After Death to these people who can not really believe in such, is almost to cruelly rub it in their faces and remind them of their depressing fate and what is eventual for them according to their beliefs.

So, their only comfort, besides distraction, is to make others likewise lose their faith and hope and to make others feel the way that they themselves may feel, because misery loves company, and there might be less jealousy and hubris among equals, or so it nsy be thought.

The Atheist, hopeless as they are, want to take away your sense of advantage, and otherwise, they might wish to not hear the Sunny things that remind them of how short and futile their brief existence is.

So, why be cruel to these unfortunate minds in the mire? They have rejected the offer of eternal life in their thinking, to the point where to hear it may irritate them and burn them.

 

[thomas t]

They have no God, no belief in supernatural help or friend, they have no future really

God alone will decide.
I'm no hell preacher, I don't believe in annihilation after death.

I noticed that some people - especially youths, even inside the churches - lose faith because of some of these atheist arguments.

So let's discuss them to see if they hold water.

Thomas