The Historical Jesus: Did He Create the Universe?

I wouldn't expect God to resort to "tricking" me. I do enough of that to myself all of the time, anyway! jar and I used to disagree on the idea of God being Good (my belief) and God being "complete" (Both good and evil).If Jesus (Gods human character) created the universe, why did He allow evil to exist?Why did He allow Hitler, Putin, and Stalin to exist and inflict so much misery on humanity?For some of us, its easier to hand-wave the belief away and accept full responsibility for the future of the planet.But then you still have to deal with creationists. And Gods original chosen people are even behaving badly!! Oy Vey!

​I have some questions for you, ICANT. I wanted to discuss the Christian philosophy of good and evil. These two definitions get tossed around a lot in modern day secular vernacular.
Food tastes good.(or not) People are judged by others as either good or not so good. (I could go on...)According to Genesis, God Himself was T=0. In fact, God was before zero since He created T=0.
It is sometimes known as the uncaused first cause. (Why? BE-Cause.) Let there be light! In the Beginning, God....So then we get to the story of Adam & Eve and the garden and the two trees.

• The Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good and Evil
• The Tree Of Life.

Peter Kreeft, a respected Catholic Apologist, states that God never directly created evil but only the possibility of evil, (which I suppose is almost the same thing) and that Satan(Lucifer) actualized that possibility, setting up what we now know as spiritual warfare.At least that's how I see it.One question for you, I CANT. Do you basically agree with Peter Kreeft in that God created the *possibility of evil* and that Lucifer actualized it, setting up the Tree of Knowledge and the whole Biblical Narrative?

This confuses me a bit. How could man decide that the devil "had to fall" if the Fall of such an angel occurred before Adam and Eve? Otherwise, why was the snake already so cunning before they ate of the forbidden tree?I *will agree* that Jesus was in the beginning and thus was in actuality the first Adam as He created Lucifer/Satan. Help me out here.Or did God use Adams disobedience to turn the snake bad?And why even have a tree in the garden which cant be touched?

In my opinion, taking a verse from the Bible will get me closer to the GOD I worship rather than me taking a verse from the Quaran, the Book of Mormon, or even the Washington Post. I think I see where you are going here. Our relationship is with a character in a book rather than the writings of the book itself. In my mind, this sort of belief would only work in making me stronger if
1) I really wanted it.
2) Jesus were actually living eternally and I had present moment access to His wisdom and Spirit.
​ Maybe that holds true for me also at times. I believe fervently that He is alive eternally. I also am very imperfect. I lie. I have an ego. I want to be right more (at times) than I want His words to be right. A perfect example at this very Forum came from my favorite conversationalist ringo.
He began telling me that I was supposed to give "it all up" and that God would want this for me. I tried to ignore what he saaid, but all along I knew (and know) that he was right.So much for my intellect!

I never have studied the Bible as much as you have. When I came to EvC in 2004, I had already "been saved" since 1993, but I was a novice at being a Bible scholar. My exposure to Biblical teaching came from believers who were to some degree leaders in the churches I attended. Most of our Bible studies back in those days focused on the New Testament, which I have basically read.In addition, I believe that since Jesus is the living word, once I accepted Jesus the word went in to me. Thus, when I read the Bible, I pull it out of my spirit from the Spirit which lives in me rather than try and understand it like I would any other book. I am not a critical thinker in the sense that I have never tried to falsify the Bible. jar ruled the roost here at EvC back in those days, and he was quite influential here. Being an Episcopal, he always said that when he went to church he never "checked his brains at the door" and thus never was afraid to question the good book. I always joke to him that he was the Apostle to the Atheists, but I never sensed that he knew God. He believed in Logic, Reason, and Reality. Whenever I would discuss the Bible and scripture, he would challenge me, as would ringo. Many of my own conclusions about scripture are subject to revision, though I wont listen to an atheist or secular humanist who does not know God.(Through Jesus)Now when it comes to science, evolution, and biology, I defer to many here at EvC who are educated in those fields of study. When it comes to the Bible, however, the only ones I will listen to are people who not only study the Bible from a believers perspective but who are open to the belief that Jesus was and is God incarnate. That leaves out a whole group of otherwise respectable Biblical Scholars and Archeologists. GDR says that where the rubber meets the road involves knowing Jesus over knowing the Bible.I have no opinion except to say that I believe that Jesus *is* the living word. I wont listen to anyone who does not believe that Jesus is alive or who believes that the Bible is full of errors. My critics may suggest that this belief severely limits me and that, in their words, I am willfully ignorant.

Well, we cant conflate evidence(tentative) with belief. What we can do is speculate.As a believer, I maintain that God was the uncaused first cause. If I CANT has a point, it is that the vast energy that is involved in the origin of the universe went from virtually infinitely small to infinitely vast, God (as Creator) would be the source of that energy.A pantheist might believe that the universe and God are one and the same, and would conflate the energy and the energizer.
The honest response is to say that we dont know.I CANT is the type of believer that will always go with the Bible over scientific study. I try and find a consensus between the two, but am a Cosmological Creationist in that I believe that God created all that is seen and unseen and that He is the source of wisdom.If critical thinking is the best method to achieve knowledge, it certainly does not always involve wisdom. Data and Evidence cant over rule our minds.

I don't know about ICANTs position, nor do I wish to conflate science with belief, but I do believe that there is a spiritual "war" or competition as such as that death and disease originated with (from) the rebel rather than the Creator.And I dont mean to suggest Dualism. There is a Creator and there is an Imitator.If I dare use any critical thinking at all, I might attempt to falsify the Imitator (The Devil Made Me Do It) while respecting my belief in a Creator. jar used to always tell me to throw God away. I never listened to him.

It really doesnt. The only point of contention between you and ICANT might be what qualifies as evidence.I never try and learn sciencee from the Bible, but I dont think it to be a futile attempt in totality. After all, whom better to ask about evidence than the the One who is *evident* in your heart and mind?Percy mentions that believers arrive(often) at different conclusions than non believers. One would think that the evidence remains the same. The belief is all that changes.

What do you personally believe, Percy? In order to stimulate the conversation in this topic, I have taken the liberty to quote from an EvC topic discussing similar ideas.
[*Could The Universe Have Been Created For No Reason?*You promoted it. Message 3
Back in those days (February 21st, 2008) we had 103 posts in two days and the topic suddenly died. Granny Magda was the final response. Some highlights: It appears that the challenge for believers here is to speculate that IF indeed Jesus (Gods character) *did* create the universe, what is the ultimate purpose? I would say that the ultimate purpose was relational between humanity and Jesus Himself. Another possible purpose (in building on that) is for humans to have an opportunity to learn to survive. The critic would then ask why God (Jesus) was necessary for that.
The retro topic was started by a member named Christian Juggalo.(Yes, he was an ICP fan! ) From his short posting History, he lasted here 3 days and has not been heard from since. He did bring up some good questions which I will pass along to ICANT. Lets see if we can get this topic going! In other topics, there is division between believers and non believers. I am curious how this topic will develop. I will add more retro quotes if needed.

Here is a scientific experiment for you.
Take 1 group of scientists. Lets say 20. (5 of them are Christians, by the way)
Take another group of Christians.
Do they have to be apologists or can they simply be pastors, elders, and leaders who have been saved longer than a year. (Being Saved is a separate topic.) Conduct a scientific experiment that makes these two groups at odds with each other.Is one group any dumber? Is one group (as a group) somehow willfully ignorant? Are they zombies? Does the other group look at the idea of God any differently than the first group?Get back to us with your *scientific* results. I can hardly wait!

Wow! So you and I are both on the sidelines munching popcorn! You are waiting to *see* Jesus and I am waiting for AZ to explain how science destroys the Christian mind virus. pass the popcorn.While we wait for either to develop, perhaps we can go catch some fish...lets use the popcorn as bait!

FYI, Jesus understands Dragonflies even better than you do.Do you believe me?

If what you are saying is true, it supports my position that God created the possibility of evil and Satan and 1/3 of the angels chose it rather than obedience.|Humans were given the same choice.Before we blame God or the snake or Eve, lets ask ourselves one question.Who created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

Pulling some more info from our 2009 retro topic:Granny Magda Message 287

quote:

---

You seem to have a very anthropocentric view of the universe, if I may say so.

​

Are we just here to live this short and sometimes chaotic and stressful life and then die and never live again on Earth or in the afterlife? That just doesn't seem very exciting to me. We live we die and we never have anything afterwords? To me that's just boring.

​

Boring eh? Well I am sorry to report that the universe doesn't care whether you are bored or not. There is no requirement that the universe should excite you. If it doesn't, I'm afraid that's what we call tough shit.
From the point of view of a materialist, the universe has no purpose, other than what purpose we ascribe to it. Whilst some may find this dispiriting, I find it rather reassuring.

​

For those who do not believe in a creator god, the universe is not top-down, but bottom-up. There is no top-down reason for our existence. Thus, our purpose, our morality and all that we are, must be our own responsibility. We must find our own reason to live.
As for how the universe formed, I suggest that you read up on the Big Bang theory, but if you are expecting an answer to the "why" type questions, you are going to be disappointed.

---

Hello,Granny. I bet you never expected to see your 2009 self quoted!

Granny:

---

For those who do not believe in a creator god, the universe is not top-down, but bottom-up. There is no top-down reason for our existence. Thus, our purpose, our morality and all that we are, must be our own responsibility. We must find our own reason to live.

---

Is this similar to trickle down economics vs raising the tide?I note where you say that our purpose *must*be our own responsibility and that we *must* be our own responsibility. Isnt that a bit the same as waving away any help and insisting we can do it ourselves? As an aside, have your views about the possibility of God changed any in the last 15 years?

C2:

---

The truth is that the tree was not of itself evil. It did not
contribute to man's sinfulness. It merely provided him
with an opportunity to obey or disobey.

---

So in essence, the possibility of evil was offered through that tree. Though I have no scriptural proof, I trust the wisdom of Catholic Apologist Peter Kreeft. ICANT maintains that God created good and evil, backed up by the scripture in Isaiah, whereas Kreeft maintains that God created the possibility of evil and that Lucifer was the first created being to choose it. Essentially it could be said that the Tree of Knowledge represented a choice between obedience and disobedience or Submission to Authority vs Autonomy.It only makes sense that Lucifer had to choose evil before Eve was presented with temptation. God never tempts anyone.Here is how Kreeft explained it.
The Problem Of Evil