(August 7, 2018 at 2:30 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: If god is the one judging and sentencing us, then Ofc it’s a test. Seems silly to try and argue otherwise.
(August 6, 2018 at 4:55 pm)SteveII Wrote: No, sorry. Having different possible outcomes does not make something a 'test'. Otherwise nearly everything is a test and the word becomes meaningless. To support this silly premise, you need to show that there was no other purpose than a 'test'. Because there is clearly another purposes: to glorify God and enjoy him forever (Westminster Shorter Catechism). Need some Bible Reference? Check our Got Answers. The fact there are two possible outcomes at the end of a life is a consequence of the system--not created by God--but essential to God. Our sins need to be atoned for to satisfy his Justice/Holiness to be in his presence. Atoned-for/not-atoned-for are the two options. No 'tests'.
Judged by your decisions. Do you think when you appear in criminal court the judge declares "you failed your test!"
His knowledge of what you will freely choose does not transfer the burden. Perhaps the event that will lead you to believe has not happened yet. Unfortunately it may never happen. But creating the world and humans has a much higher net value than not.
Because it is a secondary effect, not a primary purpose.
Steve,
If god is so just and holy, why would he go through with an imperfect creation that is inherently sinful, and unholy? Why create us at all?
It seems obvious (from reasoning) that any being with free will will choose imperfectly. A complete relationship requires free will. Other components of a maximally fulfilling life requires free will. If God wanted creatures that could have maximum fulfillment and relationships (including with him) then free will was necessary. And then we are back to free will inevitably leads to sin.
In case anyone wants to bring up God having free will, he also has other characteristics--including omniscience and being necessarily the standard of goodness.
