rhutchin

If by free will, you mean the freedom for Pharaoh to choose consistent with his desires, I do not see where God violated Pharaoh’s free will.

If by free will, you mean libertarian free will, I think there is some debate about Pharaoh having this.

God hardened Pharaoh’s heart to accomplish His purpose as stated here--

Romans 9
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

rhutchin

In the case of David, the child was born sick. David could not get God to intervene to heal the baby because of his unconfessed sin (at least, that is the way I read it).

Hell may be torture, but that torture results from lack of action by God not action by God; God will not be torturing those in hell. If you think God will torture people in hell, what do you see Him actually doing to torture people?

rhutchin

Adam seems to have been a pretty smart man. I suspect that he could find a way to write down his experiences. My guess is clay tablets. Don’t know what language he spoke.

Your question about a date is interesting. What kind of calendar do you think he used? Probably not one that used the term, BC.

rhutchin

I like that. I need to remember them so I can use them myself.

David Vestal

By that logic, I'd be innocent of murder if I buried you alive. By that logic, if I stab you, it is the knife that is guilty of the crime. Of course, that is absurd; since god made hell, and since it takes an act of god to send you there, god is guilty of torture with regard to those in hell.

gregor

Why are you all still discussing this topic with a guy who doesn't even know his own failed apologetics?

Even backwards fundamentalists know that the company line is that Moses supposedly wrote the pentateuch. When someone posits that Adam actually wrote it, he demonstrates even an ignorance of the uber-conservative position (of Mosaic authorship).

Please stop, my head hurts. STOP

James Madison

FFT, I concur in your assessment Satan was not the "serpent". Which is to say Satan did not transform himself into a "serpent".

However, there is some evidence Satan used the "serpent".

Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"....You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."


Now you have a serpent, an animal, talking about good and evil and advocating rebelling against God's commandment. Animals, from a biblical view, do not inherently possess an interest in expressing a view, if they have one of their own, on good and evil or in being obedient to God and his commandments. But angelic beings do and so does God's adversary, again from a biblical point of view. The serpent here is being used by God's adversary to subvert A and E's obedience to him.

There have been other examples in the bible where supernatural powers have caused animals to speak but it was the "supernatural" power speaking through the animal and not the animal speaking on it's own volition. For example God caused a donkey to speak to a prophet in one of the other Old Testament books.

So if the serpent is talking it is doing so because of a supernatural cause using it as a mouthpiece and since this serpent is advocating rebelliong against God we can assume it is an adversary of God speaking through the serpent.

God also said the following: And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [a] and hers; he will crush [b] your head, and you will strike his heel." Who is God talking to here?

John A. Broussard

So the pharaoh chose to do what god hardened his heart to do. And you still insist that pharaoh had free will? That he "chose consistent with his desires?"

Could he have chosen to do other than what his hardened heart had directed him to do?

You have a strange view indeed of free will, if your god can make you choose one path rather than another.

Please explain.

Jack the Bodiless

No, God said they would die IMMEDIATELY if they ate the fruit: he lied about the effects, to stop them eating it.

But the Serpent exposed God's lie. Did he do this because he wanted to help humanity, or because he wanted to cause trouble? This is not made clear (and, if the latter, this may be the "deception" referred to by Eve: it is possible to "deceive" while telling the truth).

rhutchin

As I understand the verse, that which God said was that death would be certain but not necessarily immediate (although the process of death began at that time). The fruit of the tree was not poisonous as to cause immediate death (since everything God had created was good).

God did not lie as far as I can tell, notwithstanding your efforts to show otherwise.