Why did god allow people to be born after the fall ?

[SteveII]

Definition of Libertarian Free Will: A personal explanation of some basic result R brought about intentionally be person P where this bringing about of R is a basic action A will cite the intention I of P that R occurred and the basic power B that P exercised to bring about R. P, I and B provide a personal explanation of R: agent P brought about R be exercising power B in order to realize intention I as an irreducible teleological goal. (Moreland, Blackwell's Companion to Natural Theology. p 298) 
Sin, as the deprivation of good, becomes possible the moment someone has a choice. There is good evidence that it is impossible for any single human to choose perfectly. Ergo we have good reasons to conclude that free will entails sin (at least in humans).

Sin doesn't exist outside of religion, so there is no good reason to conclude anything about it.

So what do you call the harmful things that humans do to one another?

[Harry Nevis]

Sin doesn't exist outside of religion, so there is no good reason to conclude anything about it.

So what do you call the harmful things that humans do to one another?

Harmful things. I don't need to cloak it in mythology and sky-daddies to recognize what is harmful.

[Catholic_Lady]

Definition of Libertarian Free Will: A personal explanation of some basic result R brought about intentionally be person P where this bringing about of R is a basic action A will cite the intention I of P that R occurred and the basic power B that P exercised to bring about R. P, I and B provide a personal explanation of R: agent P brought about R be exercising power B in order to realize intention I as an irreducible teleological goal. (Moreland, Blackwell's Companion to Natural Theology. p 298) 
Sin, as the deprivation of good, becomes possible the moment someone has a choice. There is good evidence that it is impossible for any single human to choose perfectly. Ergo we have good reasons to conclude that free will entails sin (at least in humans).

Sin doesn't exist outside of religion, so there is no good reason to conclude anything about it.

Sin is simply the Christian way of saying "immoral act". Surely you think those exist?

[Aegon]

God could easily provide evidence for his existence, in fact god is supposed to know exactly what would convince me. God simply does not do so. Why not?

The usual christian claim is that god does not want to force me to worship him, he wants me to choose to worship him.

Unfortunately for god, that is not how it works. Suppose that god actually turned up and demonstrated that he did in fact exist. What then? Well, I would accept that he existed. Worship him? Not even remotely.

I don't know why He doesn't do so in this world. He did as Jesus, but that was 2000 years ago. 

Yeah. I wonder.

[SteveII]

That verse is not talking about moral evil. It is clearly talking about punishment or calamity. You do realize that it was not originally written in English and you can look up the Hebrew word to understand the meaning don't you? In fact almost all translations use punishment or calamity. http://biblehub.com/isaiah/45-7.htm -- Look at the left side of the page. It has all the translations of that verse listed one after another.

Hmm...I wonder what else the bible got wrong?  Think of all those people who died believing that they were reading the word of god?

How in the world do you get that something was "gotten wrong"?? It was you who got something wrong! 

Here's a tip: every word in the Bible has been taken into consideration in developing doctrine. You (Harry Nevis) are not going to be able to take down any doctrine with what little knowledge you have or can look up on your atheist anonymous support sites. You don't have the skills.

[John V]

Why is there a problem with asking for evidence?

Because the Bible's treatment of the topic is the issue at hand. Whether the bible is demonstrably true or not is irrelevant for purposes of such a discussion. It's fine as a topic of its own, but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Suppose you're in a literature class and discussing The Scarlet Letter. It doesn't matter whether Hester Prynne existed or not. If you were assigned a paper on the themes in the book and wrote There's no evidence Hester Prynne existed, so there's no point in addressing the themes, you'd fail.

Or, as noted, when an atheist makes a post alleging a problem with the Bible, other atheists don't jump down his throat demanding evidence for the Bible. That typically happens when the atheist starts losing to Christians.

---

Sin doesn't exist outside of religion,

Considering that we're in the Christianity (a religion) forum, which is a subforum of the Religion forum, it's an appropriate point of discussion, don'tcha think?

Your point would be appropriate for the Philosophy section.

[Harry Nevis]

Sin doesn't exist outside of religion, so there is no good reason to conclude anything about it.

Sin is simply the Christian way of saying "immoral act". Surely you think those exist?

It is NOT "simply" a way of saying "immoral act". It comes with all the bullshit and the baggage of religion. You believe morals come from god. They don't. So it is in no way the same.

---

Hmm...I wonder what else the bible got wrong?  Think of all those people who died believing that they were reading the word of god?

How in the world do you get that something was "gotten wrong"?? It was you who got something wrong! 

Here's a tip: every word in the Bible has been taken into consideration in developing doctrine. You (Harry Nevis) are not going to be able to take down any doctrine with what little knowledge you have or can look up on your atheist anonymous support sites. You don't have the skills.

Take down doctrine?! Not my job. If you've swallowed the pill, it's unlikely reason or facts will persuade you otherwise. It's and emotional investment on your part.
You can't seriously tell me that all christian agree on all translations of the bible.

[possibletarian]

What is 'free will' and how do you define it and why does it entail a sinful world ?
Was it created by your god in the full knowledge of what it would bring about.. or not ?

Definition of Libertarian Free Will: A personal explanation of some basic result R brought about intentionally be person P where this bringing about of R is a basic action A will cite the intention I of P that R occurred and the basic power B that P exercised to bring about R. P, I and B provide a personal explanation of R: agent P brought about R be exercising power B in order to realize intention I as an irreducible teleological goal. (Moreland, Blackwell's Companion to Natural Theology. p 298) 
Sin, as the deprivation of good, becomes possible the moment someone has a choice. There is good evidence that it is impossible for any single human to choose perfectly. Ergo we have good reasons to conclude that free will entails sin (at least in humans).

I asked how do you define free will, not a cut and pastes from WLC. break it down for me in easy to understand english

So let me see if i get this right, if god created free will and then gave that free will to humans in full knowledge it would lead to sin, then would you agree god created man in full knowledge that they had no other option than to sin ?

[SteveII]

The evidence that I believe that supports my belief (another opinion) is below:

1. Person of Jesus is compelling.

The fact that Jesus probably existed as a historical person, lends zero evidence for any supernatural claim about him.

After all, Muhammad existed. But I am sure you would  not accept the claims that he talked to angels in a cave, or flew to heaven on a winged horse.

2. The NT describes actual events including the miracles, life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

Just because the NT describes some historical events and people, does not mean it is accurate on any supernatural claims.

Again, the Koran describes real events and people. But I am sure you have no problems dismissing the supernatural claims.

3. God works in people's lives today--changing people on the inside as well as the occurrence of miracles.

How do you know that these events are a result of god?

I have a good friend that was addicted to drugs, living on the street, perpetrating petty crimes. He walked into a Hindu temple in Los Angeles one day, and claims to have communicated with a Hindu god. He quit drugs that day, and now owns a successful small business and has a great family. Was his experience an example of a Hindu god working in his life?

4. The natural theology arguments:
a. God is the best explanation why anything at all exists.
b. God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe.
c. God is the best explanation of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.
d. God is the best explanation of intentional states of consciousness.
e. God is the best explanation of objective moral values and duties.

These have natural explanations. Those that don't, are currently unknown.

Making up answers, or using anwers others made up millenia ago, explains nothing.

Seems you are guilty of argument from ignorance here, or argument from personal incredulity. Either way, just because they may not be known at this time, lends zero credence for your claim that god exists.

Since you cannot 'prove' that any of these are falsely held beliefs, my conclusion (opinion) that God exists is rationale. The amount of evidence meets my personal threshold for proof that God exists.

Your personal threshold for proof, is set too low. You are playing basketball with an 8' rim, then bragging how great of a dunker you are.

None of the same type of 'evidence' you list above, would convince you that any other religion is true. You are guilty of special pleading.

I apologize, I should not have posted this in this thread. If I respond, it will derail this thread.  I would be happy to in another thread.

[possibletarian]

Sin is simply the Christian way of saying "immoral act". Surely you think those exist?

It is NOT "simply" a way of saying "immoral act".  It comes with all the bullshit and the baggage of religion.  You believe morals come from god.  They don't.  So it is in no way the same.

---

How in the world do you get that something was "gotten wrong"?? It was you who got something wrong! 

Here's a tip: every word in the Bible has been taken into consideration in developing doctrine. You (Harry Nevis) are not going to be able to take down any doctrine with what little knowledge you have or can look up on your atheist anonymous support sites. You don't have the skills.

Take down doctrine?!  Not my job.  If you've swallowed the pill, it's unlikely reason or facts will persuade you otherwise.  It's and emotional investment on your part.
*You can't seriously tell me that all christian agree on all translations of the bible.**

* Bold mine

Christian sects, denominations have a lot they don't agree on, as well as theology they sometimes can't even agree on what bible to use, some disagree on the story of creation itself, some don't even believe in free will which seems so important to this discussion. And yet others go to war over differences. 

As an ex Christian I can tell once you are so deep in, and having studied (read imprinted upon your mind) the bible it takes a long time to disentangle yourself from it, the ease with which people can accept outrageous fantastic beliefs as truth astounds me now, you only have to look at the middle east for that.  The mind can be de programmed though (in some cases), but none of us wants to give up what we call truth, at least not easily.

Once you are on the outside of a religious belief and you begin to see and look at things how they are without the religious filter on everything, then the world truly does become wonderful and science springs to life, I understand now when I watch such things as Blue Planet, and The Wonders of the Universe how exciting it to study and understand as a free person.