How can a perfect God create an imperfect world?
Offline How can a perfect God create an imperfect world? or “If God is all-powerful and all-knowing why didn’t He create people who couldn’t sin?” Christians usually respond by talking about free will and how love requires a choice. For true love to exist we need to choose to love.
While I believe that is true I think we should examine another answer: He is. God is creating a people who will posses the ability to love Him and free from the temptation to sin. Life is about God creating us to be the people He desires us to be.
If we go with the premise that love needs to be chosen, then if God desired creatures who, not only could He love, but also would love Him in return, then He needed to create creatures who also had the ability reject Him.
The first creatures it seems God created were the angels. These are beings who are able to live in the very presence of God (Luke 1:19), and even with their close contact with God one angel, Satan, leads a third of the angels in rebellion with God. Avoiding sin is not necessarily contingent on our closeness with God.
Then God creates people. In the first book of the Bible we read about Adam and Eve, people who walked with God every day. Again, even though they enjoyed a close relationship with God, Satan was able to convince them to rebel against God. People who experience a relationship with God at its best and they still fell into sin.
The rest of the Bible is about God’s pursuit of a people who are wholly devoted to Him. People who live, not by sight (because they have seen God), but by faith (the trust God). It is this element of faith that is essential in the creation of people who will not sin.
If people live by faith now, even though they have never sin God. If God can find people who trust and love Him now, even though they have never seen Him, how much more will they trust God when they are able to see His face?
In other words what we are experiencing right now is the necessary step that needs to be taken so we can arrive at that world in which we can have a perfect relationship with God.
- Login to post comments
So, we have premise (1) - God created humans, premise (2) - God also created humans without the ability to sin, (3) - True love involves the choice of it and (4) - God desired it this way
First conclusion: [1] - God had to create humans that would be able to choose to love him or not, some did/do, some didn't/don't.
We have premise (5) - ability to sin isn't lost or gained through proximity of God
Kind of repeats premise (5).
Premise (6) - God is in pursuit of that kind of people who are most devoted to him, and conclusion [2] - faith is essential for lack of sin
Conclusion [3] - faith-based people will be even more devout in the very presence of God
Final conclusion - This is a necessary phase.
OK, got them all, that are important, I think. Let's review them all, in an organized manner:
(1) - God created humans
(2) - God also created humans without the ability to sin
(3) - True love involves the choice of it
(4) - God desired it this way
(5) - ability to sin isn't lost or gained through proximity of God
(6) - God is in pursuit of that kind of people who are most devoted to him
Corolary: (7) - Sinning is an act of disloyalty and lack of love towards God
And conclusions:
[1] - God had to create humans that would be able to choose to love him or not, some did/do, some didn't/don't
[2] - faith is essential for lack of sin
[3] - faith-based people will be even more devout in the very presence of God
Final conclusion - This is a necessary phase
From (1), (2) and (3) naturally comes [1], no problem there. From (2), (4) and (6), with the corolary (7), naturally comes [2], no problem there either. However, (5) dictates that being in the presence of God doesn't necessary lower the sinning rate of people, or their ability. This, coupled with [2] and the corolary (7), results in a conclusion that contradicts [3].
[1], [2] and [3] are alltogether prequesites for the final conclusion, so if they are all true, combined with the premise (6), the final conclusion naturally follows. Since our logical path up to now has been correct, I hope, as long as all premises (1) to (7) are all true, the conclusion [3] cannot be true. Since not all prequesites for the final conclusion are true, the final conclusion cannot be true.
Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/
A better question is what “perfect” means in describing an omnipotent being. There are animals, such as sharks, cockroaches, and crocodiles, which have evolved very little over the millennia, because they are so well-suited to their environments already. I'm guessing that means there hasn't been a negative effect on a portion of their population significant enough to amplify particular genetic traits. Assuming “god” was a being perfectly suited to his environment, while believing that the environment is also him, leaves his perfection an adaptation to itself. If that doesn't cancel him out, his omniscience would prevent any surprises no matter what kind of variables he tried to incorporate into his creations. Even if they could function independently of his will, he would still be completely aware of every single moment in time. You could say he chose to selectively handicap his powers of perception and comprehension, but that's drawing windows on a cardboard box.
[...]
Which sounds unfathomably dumb. Not only is that imparting human characteristics onto what is meant to be beyond such limitations, but we've made our creation embarrassingly and simple-minded as well.
[...]