God doesn't understand iterative probability

[RobbyPants]

I like RPGs (the games, although rocket launchers are cool, too), and one thing I've learned to pay attention to in them is iterative probability. In these games, each challenge you face has a non-zero chance of killing your character. Of course, even if this chance is pretty small, it means that the more challenges you face, the more likely it is your character dies. This is just a fundamental truth of statistics. You cannot get around that without reducing the chance to precisely zero. Otherwise, you have to hope it's low enough that you survive the campaign, hope you get lucky, or be blindly ignorant of how these things work.

Now, apply that to the Garden of Eden.

Genesis posits a physical place where Adam and Eve can hang around doing, presumably anything they want, so long as they don't eat from one tree. Now, I cannot fathom any reason why God needed to put that tree there in the first place. Some may say that God needed to test humanity (why?). Now, if that's the case, the only reason for a test is if there's a chance for failure. If humanity was supposed to stay in the garden, as time went on, the likelihood that someone would eat form that tree would approach near certainty. That's just how these things work.

What did God think was going to happen!?

I mean obviously, this is just one more point showing the absurdity of the myth, but how do apologists reconcile this? They blame free will for all of mankind's faults and refuse to make God culpable for making faulty humans. This situation was engineered by someone who wanted humans to fail or by someone who is woefully inept. That's it. There's no magical third option.

[Chad32]

Well presumably if they stayed in the garden, and could populate the place, they'd eventually run out of room. Immortal humans without disease or predation or anything else, being able to impregnate at any time of the year, would quickly overrun all the available space, and consume all the resources until eventually there's only one thing left. The fruit from a certain tree.

There are many logical problems with this story. 

[dahrling]

I like RPGs (the games, although rocket launchers are cool, too), and one thing I've learned to pay attention to in them is iterative probability. In these games, each challenge you face has a non-zero chance of killing your character. Of course, even if this chance is pretty small, it means that the more challenges you face, the more likely it is your character dies. This is just a fundamental truth of statistics. You cannot get around that without reducing the chance to precisely zero. Otherwise, you have to hope it's low enough that you survive the campaign, hope you get lucky, or be blindly ignorant of how these things work.

Now, apply that to the Garden of Eden.

Genesis posits a physical place where Adam and Eve can hang around doing, presumably anything they want, so long as they don't eat from one tree. Now, I cannot fathom any reason why God needed to put that tree there in the first place. Some may say that God needed to test humanity (why?). Now, if that's the case, the only reason for a test is if there's a chance for failure. If humanity was supposed to stay in the garden, as time went on, the likelihood that someone would eat form that tree would approach near certainty. That's just how these things work.

What did God think was going to happen!?

I mean obviously, this is just one more point showing the absurdity of the myth, but how do apologists reconcile this? They blame free will for all of mankind's faults and refuse to make God culpable for making faulty humans. This situation was engineered by someone who wanted humans to fail or by someone who is woefully inept. That's it. There's no magical third option.

What I used to believe is that god didn't stop any of this from happening because he had a greater plan which we could not fully understand (jesus had to come and redeem us, then there'd be the rapture, the apocalypse, the 1000 year kingdom, the final judgment, and finally heaven and hell).
Yes, god knew people would be damned to hell but he created the world in order to save a few who he would pick to spend eternity with him. (thereby extinguishing the concept of "free will")
Obviously, in this case god isn't really loving and good - we basically mean nothing to him, we're just pawns in his game.
Christians believe we're meaningless as a species, they think that by admitting to this (concept of "humility") as well as by asking for forgiveness we can have our names written in the "book of life" and spend eternity with god.

[Pyrrho]

[Aroura]

I wish I could give the OP more kudo's!!

[KevinM1]

I like RPGs (the games, although rocket launchers are cool, too), and one thing I've learned to pay attention to in them is iterative probability. In these games, each challenge you face has a non-zero chance of killing your character. Of course, even if this chance is pretty small, it means that the more challenges you face, the more likely it is your character dies. This is just a fundamental truth of statistics. You cannot get around that without reducing the chance to precisely zero. Otherwise, you have to hope it's low enough that you survive the campaign, hope you get lucky, or be blindly ignorant of how these things work.

Now, apply that to the Garden of Eden.

Genesis posits a physical place where Adam and Eve can hang around doing, presumably anything they want, so long as they don't eat from one tree. Now, I cannot fathom any reason why God needed to put that tree there in the first place. Some may say that God needed to test humanity (why?). Now, if that's the case, the only reason for a test is if there's a chance for failure. If humanity was supposed to stay in the garden, as time went on, the likelihood that someone would eat form that tree would approach near certainty. That's just how these things work.

What did God think was going to happen!?

I mean obviously, this is just one more point showing the absurdity of the myth, but how do apologists reconcile this? They blame free will for all of mankind's faults and refuse to make God culpable for making faulty humans. This situation was engineered by someone who wanted humans to fail or by someone who is woefully inept. That's it. There's no magical third option.

What I used to believe is that god didn't stop any of this from happening because he had a greater plan which we could not fully understand (jesus had to come and redeem us, then there'd be the rapture, the apocalypse, the 1000 year kingdom, the final judgment, and finally heaven and hell).
Yes, god knew people would be damned to hell but he created the world in order to save a few who he would pick to spend eternity with him. (thereby extinguishing the concept of "free will")
Obviously, in this case god isn't really loving and good - we basically mean nothing to him, we're just pawns in his game.  
Christians believe we're meaningless as a species, they think that by admitting to this (concept of "humility") as well as by asking for forgiveness we can have our names written in the "book of life" and spend eternity with god.

What I can't grasp is why god would want us to join him in heaven anyway.  What does he get out of it?

I mean, the story itself is a simple carrot and stick.  "If you do what we say (which typically involves surrendering your will and possessions), you'll be rewarded with eternal paradise later.  Fail to comply, and it's eternal torture."  But why would god even need or want to set that up?  What does he gain by admitting people into heaven?  Aside from a bunch of obedient slaves, of course.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

I like RPGs (the games, although rocket launchers are cool, too), and one thing I've learned to pay attention to in them is iterative probability. In these games, each challenge you face has a non-zero chance of killing your character. Of course, even if this chance is pretty small, it means that the more challenges you face, the more likely it is your character dies. This is just a fundamental truth of statistics. You cannot get around that without reducing the chance to precisely zero. Otherwise, you have to hope it's low enough that you survive the campaign, hope you get lucky, or be blindly ignorant of how these things work.

Now, apply that to the Garden of Eden.

Genesis posits a physical place where Adam and Eve can hang around doing, presumably anything they want, so long as they don't eat from one tree. Now, I cannot fathom any reason why God needed to put that tree there in the first place. Some may say that God needed to test humanity (why?). Now, if that's the case, the only reason for a test is if there's a chance for failure. If humanity was supposed to stay in the garden, as time went on, the likelihood that someone would eat form that tree would approach near certainty. That's just how these things work.

What did God think was going to happen!?

I mean obviously, this is just one more point showing the absurdity of the myth, but how do apologists reconcile this? They blame free will for all of mankind's faults and refuse to make God culpable for making faulty humans. This situation was engineered by someone who wanted humans to fail or by someone who is woefully inept. That's it. There's no magical third option.

Don't overlook the detail about the Garden of Eden being down the road from Assyria, Arabia, Ethiopia, and Persia.  In addition the king of Tyre was said to have live in the Garden of Eden until he ticked off the emperor for collaborating with the enemy.

The Garden of Eden story is intended to show the effects of violating the First Commandment as described in Exodus 34:10-17.

[JuliaL]

Explanation A:
He was bored.
REALLY bored.  That's the price of omniscience.
So he, like Mr. Deity, turned off part of his omniscience for a while (He can do that, part of being omnipotent.)
And the garden was a beta test.  He ran the game with "free will" for the players and found out that fig leaves make really bad g-strings.


Explanation B:
He doesn't live up to his PR.
He's kind of a powerful bumbler but in no way omniscient or omnipotent.
Built the garden but it's got the obvious flaws.  Had to do a hard reset on humanity a couple of times.
Lied to the writers of the Bible to stroke his own ego.

[KevinM1]

Explanation C: He's the embodiment of how ancient Middle Eastern sheep fuckers saw the world, and should be treated as such.