Sorry Eleutheros, I missed this from further up the page…
My thoughts would be around Mic 6:8…
*
and to walk humbly with your God?*
To do justly <κρίμα> krima “justice/equity” is a righteous thing (Isa 33:5) and combined with the love of mercy puts us in a good place to be walking according to His will.
Greetings Steve!
While I wouldn’t say that I have, “a dog in the fight,” I have written much on this topic of The Problem of Pain and Suffering from my perspective.
My perspective comes from how I understand Genesis. I have spent a very long time pondering Genesis by seeking answers to the questions such pondering brings. I have said before that I started my understanding trying to get Genesis, “right,” because I figured that if I understood Genesis, everything else would fall into place.
Well noted! That was one of the first things I pondered as I wrote out my Genesis narrative. Have you read it?
The phrase Jehovah used in Genesis 2:17 is notoriously difficult to translate, for Jehovah Elohim just repeats the word for death, “…eat day thereof die die.”
…Which is not the same phrase that Ishsha repeated back in answer to the The Nacash; for she both added to, and subtracted from, the Words of Jehovah when she said, “…no eat of, no touch, lest die,” exactly as you observed.
However, what you can’t observe without consulting an interlinear, is that The Nacash did repeat back the exact phrase, to Ishsha, which, to my way of thinking means It’s words should be translated as a question of surprise for hearing Ishah’s distortion. His reply was: “not, ‘eat thereof die die?!?’”
So, I asked myself, “Were the words It spoke next: ‘For (Jehovah) Elohim knows that day eat of, eyes opened, exist (as) Elohim, knowing good (and) evil.’ the truth, or a lie?”
I think it was the truth, but the truth told in such a way that it tapped into the sense of distrust The Nacash heard in Ishah’s reply.
Regardless, something happened to them on that day that changed them.
I propose that what changed was that they acquired a conscience, which implies that a conscience did not exist in them prior to eating from, “The tree of the knowledge of the difference between good and evil,” which, “the knowledge of the difference between good and evil,” is the definition of a conscience!
Therefore, I hold that the Words of Jehovah about what would happen on the day they ate the fruit of this tree should read something like this: “In the day you eat of it, in dying, you will die.” This rendering implies something dramatic would change in them, rather than them just simply dying (spiritually or physically), which is what Ishsha wrongly came to believe Jehovah meant!
Ishsha was truly innocent, as was Ish. But their innocence was of a unique kind: as I wrote in a previous post,
I will also add that innocence, which must be defined as not knowing of the difference between good and evil, is useless.
We need to have this knowledge if we are to interact with other human beings besides one’s own self.
Therefore, Ishsha did not have a bent toward sinning before she wrongly acquired a conscience, but what she and Ish did have was the ability to trust or distrust the words of Jehovah.
The Genesis account is a story, first and foremost.
That was why I took all I had learned and put into a story, because a story can bring a human perspective and, if well written, it can make the reader feel things, which is not something a thesis on theology with a thousand-dollar vocabulary will ever be able to convey.
Perhaps you could read it through and tell me what you think?
Be good!
Dennis!
Cool reply!
Yes, love does lead to righteousness because love always leads to doing the right thing by others in our interactions with others. And that is what righteousness - being a good human being, good at being human - is all about!
I will add that empathy is at the core of love. Empathy creates an understanding and compassionate heart because really, we are all of the same spirit, and so we can know what another feels by examining closely how we feel, and why we feel what we feel. And all of that is intimately linked to our thoughts because every thought within us creates an emotion!
Be good!
Dennis!
Let’s briefly return to this philosophical and theological reflection, upon God, suffering and evil:
Eternal Selves and The Problem of Evil
I like to share a brief story, from Chinese Taoist philosophy - for reflection:
Without reading all posts, let me just say I have an initial reaction to the title… Most of the title I think is true with exception of the allow evil clause. That baffles me how one can claim God does not allow evil. The only way that would be possible, I surmise would be if God is not powerful enough to stop it… The rest of the title I can get behind, but not that part. Someone want to adress that specifically?
OK, so I went back and read some posts. I guess I am not ready to reduce God to someone powerless… I get the arguement, but I just see God as a cosmic failure if he created such a world capable of so much evil that he can’t stop. It is almost absurdity to me. God created all of this, and one mistake and his plans are derailed and is powerless to stop, at least directly. He must be passive until all become passive. Almost unfathomable, though I admit, not impossible.
Still, we know far less than we think we do. All I know is the God could be called cruel to cause all nature to suffer for one man’s fall. So the lion and the lamb lived in peace, Adam sinned, now the lion eats the lamb and the lamb suffers. The mouse suffers at the mouse of the cat… The mosquito suffers at the mouth of the bat… So much suffering because of one man’s fall? And if not because if that, because it was designed that way from the begining? And if so, how is that coherent with a passive, merciful God? Sorry, paidion, this does NOT solve the problem if evil, it just demotes God to a mere god.
The problem there Gabe is that the title was framed as a statement of fact or opinion, as opposed to a question posed to be discussed. It could have been… “Does God create, commit, or allow evil?” — but that may not have served Hermano’s purposes??
Exactly.
Does one imagine the fall to be an accident and now God is scrambling with plan B? Or is there actually a design in the fall? Romans 11:32 is easily understood to reveal that there was a design in the fall with a purpose… creating the opportunity for God to demonstrate mercy. You see before creation and the fall of creation God knew he was merciful and gracious, but he had no opportunity to exercise this character trait. There was no one to forgive. There was no one to help. There was no undeserved sinner to bless. So God ordained the fall for exactly that purpose, to demonstrate grace.
Now for those offended at this thought. the Scriptures also explain the overflow of God’s grace and mercy will super abundantly overwhelm any pain caused by the fall. We do not yet see the grand conclusion of grace. But Christians, by faith, hold on to the promise that God works all things together for good, for those who are called, in the end, all mankind.
So we have a choice. We can moan how terrible it is that Houdini is bound in the chains of his feeble ‘free will’ or we can smile knowing that God will make a way when there seems to be no way. Of course the Houdini example is an excellent example because Houdini died in the effort because he was a mere man with a feeble will, but we know that God will succeed and finally restore all things by his mighty power.
So what will it be, moaning over man’s feeble will or cheering for God’s mighty will? Yet whether we moan or cheer, Christ will be victorious!
I was on my cell phone for those two posts above. If you ever see several incomplete thoughts, misspellings, you can be sure it is due to my cellphone usage 
- Ahem, not that I am the greatest writer anyway - far from it. Anyhow, now I am at a PC and I can probably present my objection more fairly without misrepresenting others.
First, I want to layout what I believe is possible, though far fetched. That alone doesn’t make it wrong, but I want to be fair. Second, I’ll present what I think are some objections.
Ok, what I write below is not what I believe, but I do think it is very possible, though unlikely. The below would not make God a failure, but it does have a few holes in it, I believe. Though I think this fairly represents Hermano and Paidon.
Ok, so the above is definitely a possibility. I have always(Ok, not true! When you were an ECTer Gabe, you were never willing to explore other positions!!!) been willing to challenge my beliefs. This does, in fact, challenge them. In fact, is really does very much appear the way Christ is and if Christ is the directly mirror of God, then, well… Aside from some red lettered words, the Bible is somewhat not a good source. I don’t object to this as I don’t worship the Bible, I worship Christ. Still, I have objections and I am sure my objections are nothing new to my opposition.
Objections
a) If God does not ‘force’ others against their will, then how was I born? Why was I forced to play this game? I didn’t ask (God, please don’t snuff my life out! Just using my reasoning!!!) for this. Now, truly, I am glad I am here in America with food, but I would not be glad if I was raised in some poor ghetto to be sent to the slaughters.
b) Why did create something so sensitive that one move and the whole of creation spins out of control. Suffering is magnified and all of creation suffers a great deal because of someone else, or because it was designed that way from the beginning. Why does a cat eat a mouse? Poor thing. They are cute, by the way. Most creatures are beautiful, and I bet all of them are once seen in the proper light. Though, bugs creep my the heck out. Keep those things away from me, especially those ugly weta’s
c) If the fall wasn’t the goal and the natural state of their earth, then why did god create such violence with it? The cat toys with the mouse as it kills it. It is almost evil the way it does it. But, the cat is just doing what it was genetic designed to do. The mouse is cute, but will be gutted and eaten. In fact, the ecosystem of the earth is so finely tuned that to call it a ‘mistake’ due to the fall is almost unfathomable. Do tell how things worked before this ‘fall’ where no mosquitoes were getting eaten? Where do they get their blood to reproduce? Ahah! Perhaps, before the fall there was no such thing as ‘reproduction’ and therefore there was a static, set amount of animals and insects living perfectly harmonious. Ok, I am on board until Adam accidentally stepped on an ant and killed it, or ate the leafy green with a aphid on it
d) How in the stinking world have we NOT managed to destroy this entire world? Every every dictator has been thwarted. To me, this is a sign of God, not luck that mere humans are someone banded together to defeat the evil forces. Besides, technically speaking, if the way God works is the way I suggested above, then all those people who fought in the world were NOT good people, they were just of a different evil sort (evil for evil). This is by far my biggest objection. Because all the ‘good’ men who thwarted the evil men who want to take over the world were just fighting evil with evil and hence, they were evil. So there were no good guys. Now, scripturally I suppose you could argue that evil is a divided Kingdom, therefore, yes, those who fought to stop Hitler were not good men. Wow. Just wow. I can’t behind that. To be fair, just because I can’t behind that does mean it isn’t true. All of us have some degree of evil and good in us. None of us is wholly good, but I see the men who opposed Hitler as heroes. But maybe that is because I don’t understand Christ.
I think I will remain agnostic on these matters. I’ll continue to do and act what I believe is right, and hence, I cannot accept the position that God does not allow evil, because I believe he does. However, there must be a reason for all of this pain and suffering. Maybe pain and suffering isn’t evil, maybe it is a part of growth.
Steve, I don’t believe Adam and Eve were the first and only two humans on the face of the earth at the time. As Dennis has mentioned, it is a story. This story was not meant to tell us exactly how everything was created. The Bible is basically telling us that God is the Creator of the heavens and the earth and all that is in it. That’s as far as it goes for me, and I accept that. So to answer you question, Eve was a human being; and as humans,we all have our own minds to think what we want to think.
Actually, here are a couple of articles - to support your view, LLC.
Were Adam and Eve the first humans?
BBC - Future - Could just two people repopulate Earth?
Did God create other people besides Adam and Eve?
10 Things I Wish Everyone Knew About Adam and Eve
Let me briefly cite the articles:
The first one is a theological perspective, by Rev. Jim Persinger.
The second is a scientific article - by the BBC
The third is a Christian discussion
The fourth one is a theological perspective
Let me quote from the first article:
You can view his scriptural exegesis
Let me briefly quote, from the fourth article:
That is the intro to a podcast discussing Beck’s book (Reviving Old Scratch: Demons and the Devil for Doubters and the Disenchanted), recommended by Richard Murray on Facebook. I like Richard Beck, but I disagree with him about the question of Satan, and evil.
Here was my FB comment to Richard Murray today concerning his promotion of Beck’s podcast (Murray had been unfamiliar with Beck up to this point, but I was already familiar with him):
Blessings.
God doesn’t directly cause evil He permits Satan and evil agents to destroy. God is essentially light (holiness). The beauty of holiness is humility.
How humble is God?
God is the tree in the forest that
allows itself to die and will not defend itself in front of those
with the ax, not wanting to cause them shame
And God is the earth that will allow itself to
be deformed by man’s tools, but He cries; yes, God cries,
but only in front of His closest ones.
And a beautiful animal is being beaten to death,
but nothing can make God break His silence
to the masses and say,
“Stop, please stop, why are you doing this to Me?”
How humble is God? Kabir wept when I knew.
Kabir
That’s not to say that God doesn’t have wrath. But His wrath is simply removing His mercy from the hearts of evil agents and letting them go their own way. They destroy themselves. Just as it tells us in the N.T. people are handed over to Satan for the destruction of the ego (flesh). The way I see it is that God directly created Satan, Adam and Eve perfect by grace since they didn’t deserve to be created. It was grace that sustained their heart’s. For justifiable reasons only known to Him, God removed His grace from their hearts and they acted according to their own corrupt desires and will. They are therefore responsible for their evil actions.
Satan, Adam and Eve sinned because they wanted to. God gave them the freedom to act according to their own corrupt desires and will when He removed His mercy. It was their choice. That’s free will. With God’s mercy on people’s hearts they come to Christ because they want to. This is the essence of true freedom. In the end everybody will get what they most want.
Without God’s mercy Satan had no desire for God. That is to say He wanted to rebel. The same for Adam and Eve. With God’s mercy we desire Christ. That is to say we want to come. In heaven all desire for sin is removed. We will still choose what we want. But because all desire for sin is gone we will be like God in that it will be impossible for us to sin. We still choose what we want - love God above all else and each other without sin. Those in hell are separated from God’s mercy. Therefore their hearts harden. They will do what they want ~ Blaspheme and hate God and each other forever. That is to say they have no desire for God and His love.
jeff@dgjc.org Said:
Absolutely the second most crazy thing I have heard after Eusebius’s diatribe.
I’m going to smack my wife so she can see how well and how gracious my mercy can be 
Gosh, you guys are crazy.
[size=150]^^^^got that right Chad^^^^[/size]
davo - You WANT Chad to smack his wife?? That is cold, dude… 
More seriously, I agree with the two posts above.
I’m of the same opinion, though I don’t discount historicity in the sense that the line between the literal and the legend is more than a little undefined. I view Adam as taken/chosen by God “from the dust of the earth” i.e., humanity, and placed by God as Priest in the garden paradise to serve Him. I see Adam in this sense as proto-Israel, i.e., he is Israel personified… Jesus came as true Israel the last Adam etc.
Like Adam, Israel was given the command/s of God and Paradise, i.e., the land of promise, but through disobedience (covenant unfaithfulness) was exiled, banished from His presence.
Adam’s story is the microcosmic story of Israel… Israel’s story is the macrocosmic version of the Adam story. Both have the Promise of restoration (covenantal resurrection) which ALL found fulfillment in the person of Jesus… True Israel & Last Adam.
Unlike Moses (**Num 20:10, 12; Psa 106:32-33; **Ex 7:1; 4:16]) Jesus did not find equality with God something to be grasped (Phil 2:6; Jn 14:9).
Given now she’s the X-factor… be my guest http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/Paidion9/Emoticons/rotflmao.gif
