Why would a perfect garden need anyone to look after it?

[walterpthefirst]

6 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Show me where it says God makes us lean towards evil.  That’s what you’re saying.  

 

He's too smart to do that directly.

 

He gets someone else to do the tempting.

[walterpthefirst]

You wanted to know how Satan entered Eden.

 

I've just told you why.

 

But I can still tell you how, if you'd like to know.

 

I have the chapter and verse to hand.

 

Please let me know.

[Edgarcito]

I think we can agree there is good and evil in this world.  How is good achieved if we are bound to disobeying. God interjects good into  our midst to make us look even worse?  The crafty bastard that you insist he is….

[walterpthefirst]

11 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I think we can agree there is good and evil in this world.  How is good achieved if we are bound to disobeying. God interjects good into  our midst to make us look even worse?  The crafty bastard that you insist he is….

 

Not exactly.

 

If you thought that god gave the Law to the Jews to make them righteous in his sight, think again.  He gave it to them so that their disobedience (trespass) would increase.  The Law justifies nobody.  It was given so that god's grace would increase.

 

Romans 5 : 18 - 21

 

18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 

19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 

21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

The one trespass in verse 18 is Adam's one act of disobedience.  The one righteous act is Jesus' sacrifice on the cross.  Through Adam's act of disobedience, all were made sinners and through Jesus sacrifice many will be made righteous.

 

Where sin increases, so does god's grace.

 

And this neatly explains why he caused Adam and Eve to disobey him.  So that his grace to everyone might increase.  The key point to grasp is that without guilt, there is no possibility of mercy and forgiveness.  So god could not have shown his mercy to the innocent Adam and Eve if they had remained innocent.

 

He HAD to make them guilty of just one act of disobedience.  That's all he needed.  Once he had that in his pocket his plan was up and running.  

 

And yes, god's a crafty bastard.  Look how easily he played Satan, letting him do the tempting and keeping his own hands clean.

[Edgarcito]

If it’s necessary that everyone be bound to evil that they might be saved, how is that evil?  Saved= evil?

[Edgarcito]

I think you’re hardened by your subjection Walter.  Visit w you another time, thx.

[walterpthefirst]

Just now, Edgarcito said:

If it’s necessary that everyone be bound to evil that they might be saved, how is that evil?  Saved= evil?

 

So who is doing the evil here, Ed?

 

Do you think it was good of god for him to deny us our free will and choose who will go to heaven and who won't?

Do you think it was good of god to entrap his two children this way, by giving them a command they couldn't obey?

Do you think it was good of god to allow Satan to harm them by tempting them to disobey him?

Do you think it was good of god to leave Satan unchained, when the other fallen angels were chained up?

Do you think it was good of god to knowingly spoil and ruin his own 'very good' creation as part of his plan?

Do you think it was good of god to not explain to Adam and Eve what death was?

Do you think it was good of god to add his curses to the punishment (death) he said he would give them?

Do you think it was good of god to inflict pain, disease and death on generations on unborn people for what Adam did?

Do you think it was good of god to deny Adam and Eve the possibility of reconciliation with him during their lifetimes?

Do you think it was good of god to burn billions of people in hell forever so that others can dwell in heaven forever?

 

Do you think all of these things, which can only be laid at god's door (the buck stops here) are good?

 

Really?

 

You're happy to worship a god who would do all of this 'good'?

[walterpthefirst]

13 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I think you’re hardened by your subjection Walter.  Visit w you another time, thx.

 

Or I see clearly what is emotionally unacceptable to you, Ed.

 

 

And yes, its getting late here, so...

 

 

Good night.

[Edgarcito]

5 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

So who is doing the evil here, Ed?

 

Do you think it was good of god for him to deny us our free will and choose who will go to heaven and who won't?

Do you think it was good of god to entrap his two children this way, by giving them a command they couldn't obey?

Do you think it was good of god to allow Satan to harm them by tempting them to disobey him?

Do you think it was good of god to leave Satan unchained, when the other fallen angels were chained up?

Do you think it was good of god to knowingly spoil and ruin his own 'very good' creation as part of his plan?

Do you think it was good of god to not explain to Adam and Eve what death was?

Do you think it was good of god to add his curses to the punishment (death) he said he would give them?

Do you think it was good of god to inflict pain, disease and death on generations on unborn people for what Adam did?

Do you think it was good of god to deny Adam and Eve the possibility of reconciliation with him during their lifetimes?

Do you think it was good of god to burn billions of people in hell forever so that others can dwell in heaven forever?

 

Do you think all of these things, which can only be laid at god's door (the buck stops here) are good?

 

Really?

 

You're happy to worship a god who would do all of this 'good'?

Not at all what I asked.  Please answer the question.

[walterpthefirst]

10 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Not at all what I asked.  Please answer the question.

 

If it’s necessary that everyone be bound to evil that they might be saved, how is that evil?  Saved= evil?

 

Paul answers the question in Romans 3.

 

5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 

6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 

7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 

8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!

 

The human argument is that if the evil I do increases god's glory, then I should do evil and not be condemned for it.  Then, god could not judge the world, because evil-doers would be excused of their evil-doing.  They could justifiably argue that they were only doing evil to increase god's glory.  Or, putting it another way, they were using the 'glorification of god' argument as an excuse to carry on satisfying their evil natures.

 

But Paul is having none of that.

All human evil will be properly judged by god regardless of the end result.  As far as humans are concerned, evil is evil, regardless of the outcome.  That is why he says people who use this argument to do evil will be justly condemned by god.

 

But what about god increasing human evil by binding everyone and causing them to disobey him?  Surely the same rule applies?  That would then lead to a paradox.  God would then have to judge himself because he was the true cause of the human evil that he increased by binding everyone into a state of disobedience.

 

But how could god possibly judge himself?  The one who sits in the seat of judgment occupies a position of power and authority over the one who is being judged.  The judge has the right, the power and the authority to mete out justice and to punish or forgive the one being judged.  Since there is no higher authority than god, nobody can judge him.  He is above judgement.  

 

On that basis Paul excuses god from being judged and found guilty of increasing evil by causing humans to disobey him.

 

The logic involved here goes like this.

If a human being did any of the things god did (see my list of the 10 evil things god did, which I posted 9 hours ago) they could be judged and found guilty of doing evil or increasing evil.  But when god does these things he cannot be accused of doing evil or increasing evil, nor can he be judged on the matter.  For the reason, given above.  There is no higher authority that can sit in judgement on him.

 

Paul confirms that god is above the judgement of others in Romans 9.

 

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 

20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”

21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

 

So, in a nutshell Ed, Paul says that there are two standards at work here.  Humans are held to god's standard and are judged by him but god himself is not held to any standard by anyone else.  He can do as he pleases, confident that he cannot be held accountable for it.  

 

And that is why he can increase evil by binding us to disobedience, yet not be held accountable for the evil that results.

 

If Paul were writing the words on President Truman's desk it would read, "The buck does not stop here."

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Btw Ed, I will be asking you if you think god's actions in Eden were evil.

 

We already know that you would prevent evil and suffering from happening to your children.

 

God allowed evil and suffering to come to his children and he also caused them to do evil by making them disobey him.

 

So I will be asking you to compare your loving actions towards your children with god's actions towards his children.

 

Thus far you've successfully evaded saying anything about the morality of god's actions in Eden.

 

But that time will come and when it does I will be asking if you think god was a good father towards his children.

 

If it turns out that you won't answer, well....  

[walterpthefirst]

Here's how things stand between us, Ed.

 

You asked about these things.

 

One, that God violated Adam and Eve's free will and two, that God does this on purpose. 

How did Satan enter the garden? 

Why is the knowledge of [good and] evil there?
And if God is alive even through periods of death and decay, how are His actions not equally valid despite the various time frames?

 

We've covered the first, which is why I've struck it out.

 

Do you still want me to explain from scripture how Satan entered the garden of Eden?

 

I'm happy to do so.

 

Please let me know.

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Well, it's entirely possible that Edgarcito is done with this thread.  Or not.  But he asked me four things and only one of them has been answered so far.

 

One, that God violated Adam and Eve's free will and two, that God does this on purpose. 

How did Satan enter the garden? 

Why is the knowledge of [good and] evil there?
And if God is alive even through periods of death and decay, how are His actions not equally valid despite the various time frames?

 

Therefore, because I'm meticulous and like to cross my t's and dot my i's, I'll carry on and answer Ed's other queries.  Perhaps, when he sees this he might choose to engage again.  But even if he doesn't, this thread isn't exclusively a dialogue just between the two us.  If anyone else wishes to ask questions, take issue with something or make a point I'll be delighted to respond and interact with them.   Please do so.

 

So, tomorrow or as soon as possible I'll answer his question, 'How did Satan enter the garden of Eden?'

 

I'm also able to say some more about Satan's role in god's grand plan.  Many Christians believe that god permitted him to enter Eden to test Adam and Eve.  They believe that god made the first man and woman fully capable of resisting the temptations of the serpent.  That Adam and Eve were solely at fault for being lead astray.  That they could have freely chosen to obey god's command to not eat from the forbidden tree.  But instead they freely chose to disobey their creator and listen to Satan.

 

However, according to the bible itself, these beliefs are false, mistaken and quite wrong.  As I will show.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

14 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

How did Satan enter the garden? 

 

I would presume he/she/it either walked or flew into the garden.     Especially if the wheel had yet to be invented.

 

Sorry.  A compulsion made me write that.

[walterpthefirst]

John Milton is very imaginative, when it comes to describing how Satan entered Eden, Weezer.

 

Here's a snippet from a synopsis of Book IV of Paradise Lost.

 

Satan now approaches Eden, which is surrounded by a great thicket wall. He easily leaps over it like a wolf entering a sheep’s pen. Inside he sees an idyllic world, with all varieties of animals and trees. He can see the tallest of the trees, the Tree of Life—and next to it, the forbidden Tree of Knowledge. He perches himself on the Tree of Life, disguised as a cormorant, a large sea bird. 

 

 

Huh?

 

[walterpthefirst]

OK then. 

 

Most of us sceptics, agnostics and atheists might regard the bible and Milton's Paradise Lost as works of fiction.  But in this thread I'm playing Devil's Advocate and taking the position of a Christian apologists who believes that the bible is all true.  That it is god's Word.  A mixture of fact, poetry, metaphor and symbolism - but all still true.

 

On that basis, what does it say about how Satan entered Eden?  Well, there's Jesus' own testimony, given in Luke 10: 17 - 20.  

 

17 The seventy-two returned with joy and said, “Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.”

18 He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. 

19 I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you. 

20 However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”

 

So where did Satan fall from and where to?

 

Revelation 12 : 7 - 9

 

7 Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 

8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 

9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

 

The clues are starting to fall into place.

Satan was cast out of heaven and was hurled down to earth with his rebel angels.  He is named as the ancient serpent who leads the whole world astray.  This agrees with the passage in Genesis 3 where the serpent leads Eve astray, tempting her to disobey god's command not to eat the forbidden fruit from the forbidden tree.  So this places him, in his role of tempter and in the guise of a serpent, on Earth, with easy access to Eden.

 

We know that Satan must have had easy access to that garden because god had left it unguarded.  Only after Adam sinned did god post a guard and even then, that was to stop Adam and Eve from going back into Eden after god had expelled them.

 

Genesis 3 :

 

After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

 

These passages tell us how Satan entered Eden.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[midniterider]

On 6/18/2024 at 2:57 PM, Weezer said:

I would presume he/she/it either walked or flew into the garden.     Especially if the wheel had yet to be invented.

 

Sorry.  A compulsion made me write that.

 

He took an Uber.

[midniterider]

On 6/18/2024 at 2:37 PM, walterpthefirst said:

  But even if he doesn't, this thread isn't exclusively a dialogue just between the two us.  If anyone else wishes to ask questions, take issue with something or make a point I'll be delighted to respond and interact with them.   Please do so.

 

 

 

 

I was just wondering what makes a garden perfect? Doesn't perfection denote personal preference? The perfect cup of coffee for one person would make another person gag and not be perfect at all. 

 

God apparently decided it would be perfect to have a garden that required tending to. Maybe it was an emotional choice. Maybe it gave him a good feeling to have 2 idiots walking around in it.  It was just, perfect. From his point of view.

 

On the other hand, a person who venerates logic and reason might say that a perfect garden is one that is self-sustaining, 

 

 

[Edgarcito]

3 hours ago, midniterider said:

 

I was just wondering what makes a garden perfect? Doesn't perfection denote personal preference? The perfect cup of coffee for one person would make another person gag and not be perfect at all. 

 

God apparently decided it would be perfect to have a garden that required tending to. Maybe it was an emotional choice. Maybe it gave him a good feeling to have 2 idiots walking around in it.  It was just, perfect. From his point of view.

 

On the other hand, a person who venerates logic and reason might say that a perfect garden is one that is self-sustaining, 

 

 

The difference M....outside of the garden we don't understand quantum mechanics.....In the garden, it all fits nicely....lol

 

[walterpthefirst]

6 hours ago, midniterider said:

 

I was just wondering what makes a garden perfect? Doesn't perfection denote personal preference? The perfect cup of coffee for one person would make another person gag and not be perfect at all. 

 

God apparently decided it would be perfect to have a garden that required tending to. Maybe it was an emotional choice. Maybe it gave him a good feeling to have 2 idiots walking around in it.  It was just, perfect. From his point of view.

 

On the other hand, a person who venerates logic and reason might say that a perfect garden is one that is self-sustaining, 

 

 

 

Just so that you know midniterider, I've dropped the requirement for Eden to be perfect from my argument in this thread.

 

Posted June 11

Posted 8 hours ago

  On 6/11/2024 at 1:03 AM, walterpthefirst said:

  8 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Perhaps you could explain what Genesis 2 : 15 means, Ed?

 

The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

 

We are currently stuck on your claim of a perfect garden.  Could you please defend your words given you are devil’s advocating… thx

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If you're still stuck on my claim of perfection in Eden Ed, then I can unstick you.

 

The logic of my argument works even if Eden wasn't perfect.  According to the bible, death and decay didn't exist in it or anywhere in the entire world until after Adam sinned.  Before that event god put him in the garden to work it and look after it.  That task of work required a helpmate, which was found in Eve.  So, her existence is tied to Adam's role, the one given to him by god.  To look after the garden and tend it.

 

But if nothing died or decayed in Eden, why was there any need for a gardener and his helpmate to work it and look after it?  Unless you want to dispute that nothing died or decayed before Adam sinned you are now unstuck and free to answer my question.  I've dropped my claim about Edenic perfection.

 

So, we're now back to my question, which I would like to answer please.

 

If nothing died or decayed in Eden, why was there any need for a gardener to work it and look after it?

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

But the question still stands, based upon what the apostle Paul says in the book of Romans.

 

 

If decay and death only entered the world after Adam sinned, why was there any need for a gardener to work it or look after it before then?

 

 

For those who venerate reason and logic, they trump personal preference, maybes and speculation every time.

 

Why?

 

Because they are universal, applying to everyone.

 

Because they offer a direct path to a better understanding of scripture than can be gained by faith.

 

Because, time after time, they demolish the illogical and unreasonable arguments promoted by Christian apologists.

[walterpthefirst]

Ok then.  Satan and his rebel angels have been cast out of heaven, down to earth, where they have access to the garden of Eden

 

It would have been easy for god to bind Satan and all of the other fallen angels in chains of darkness, where they could do no harm to Adam and Eve, on whom the fate of all creation depended.

 

2 Peter 2 : 4

 

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment;

 

Jude 6

 

And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.

 

So why wasn't Satan bound in chains of darkness too?  Since god cannot make mistakes he must have been left him  unchained for a reason.  But what reason?   It can't have been to tempt Adam and Eve, as is traditionally believed by most Christians.

 

Why?  Because, if Adam and Eve were programmed by god to disobey his commands, there was no need to allow Satan to tempt them.  Sooner or later they would have disobeyed him without any prompting from Satan to do so.  Why?  Because god prevented them from obeying him.  He bound their lesser wills to his, all-powerful will, subjugating their freedom of choice and making them slaves to disobedience.  See Romans 11 : 32.

 

It's a sophisticated piece of skulduggery on god's part.

 

First, he creates two people unable to obey him.  Next, he hangs the fate of all creation on them keeping a command.  Then he gives them a command that they can't possibly keep.  The end result is inevitable.  They disobey him, bringing down all of creation in the process.  Everyone is now a guilty, disobedient sinner, just as he wanted.  Now he can have mercy upon everyone because nobody can ever be innocent again without Christ's blood.  Mission accomplished without any input needed from Satan.

 

If Satan was needed to tip the balance and cause them to yield to temptation, this would contradict Romans 11 : 32, where god is revealed as the prime mover and true cause of human disobedience.  To prevent the possibility that he could be held responsible for causing people to sin, god needed a fall guy, a patsy who could be tricked into carrying the can for something that god was actually responsible for.

 

Look no further than Satan.

 

So here is our explanation why god allowed him to enter Eden and tempt Eve.  Not to cause her or Adam to disobey god.  That was already a certainty.  Planned and arranged by god.  See Romans 11 : 32.  No, the real reason Satan was permitted into Eden by god was so that he could be blamed for doing god's evil, dirty work.  There's even a passage of scripture that illuminates this.

 

James 1 : 13 - 15

 

13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 

14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. 

15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

 

Yes, god doesn't directly tempt anyone.  Instead he gets someone else to do the dirty work for him.  

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

[midniterider]

18 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Just so that you know midniterider, I've dropped the requirement for Eden to be perfect from my argument in this thread.

 

 

If nothing died or decayed in Eden, why was there any need for a gardener to work it and look after it?

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

Ok, thanks, Walter. 

 

Only thing I can come up with is the bible was written by men who had their own human thoughts about gardens. 

Or God decided having people would make the garden less boring. 

 

That may be the whole point of life. Creating experience. And drama. 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

50 minutes ago, midniterider said:

 

Ok, thanks, Walter. 

 

Only thing I can come up with is the bible was written by men who had their own human thoughts about gardens. 

Or God decided having people would make the garden less boring. 

 

That may be the whole point of life. Creating experience. And drama. 

 

 

 

 

Oh I agree with you on that score, midniterider.

 

I have no doubt in my mind that the bible was written by men.

 

With no input from any god.

 

 

But just to reiterate the point, in this thread I'm playing Devil's Advocate and treating the bible as it were the inspired Word of god and factually and historically true.

 

By doing that and applying logic many things that Christians don't like, don't want to acknowledge and can't accept are revealed.

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Walter.

[mwc]

On 6/20/2024 at 2:54 PM, walterpthefirst said:

 

If decay and death only entered the world after Adam sinned, why was there any need for a gardener to work it or look after it before then?

 

     Tidying up?

 

     I am assuming that all plants existed and so, for example, trees should simply lose their leaves for whatever reason not just decay.  However, I would think the leaves should decay once they're separated from the tree.

 

     I'm also picturing overgrowth.  If things simply grow then they'd need to be trimmed.

 

      If magic has somehow taken care of these issues then I suppose the caretaker could be used for aesthetics or something similar.  They could just make changes to the garden just for the sake of making changes.  It sounds pointless and it is but that's their job.  Just like we might imagine the purpose, or job, of every other animal in such a place is pointless.

 

          mwc