Does man have a soul?

[EarthScienceguy]

What is the true physical and spiritual nature of man? Does man have a soul?

Over the centuries there has been three categories that these theories fall into.

1. the naturalistic theories which makes man an animal like any other creature. Naturalistic evolution would fall into this category. Although this theory will struggle in this discussion to overcome current theories in cosmology that makes man some sort of virtual creature instead of a specific entity. Man is void of free will because the future already has to be determined.

In this view man is only material.

2. Pantheistic theories which claim that man is god and god is man. There are many of variations of this type of theory. But they all have the idea of a god or force directing the creation of the cosmos. All of life exist as the same energy force. All of man is the same because we all come from the same force.

In this view man consists of a material body and god.

3. Creator God. Each man is an individual entity. Man is not God and God is not man. God created man as an living being distinct from rest of creation. The only thing that man has in common with the animals is the life processes that make them up.

In this view man consist of a material body and an eternal soul.

[ttruscott]

So you agree that God is fallible?

You tell me how the biblical definition of HIS being all knowing makes HIM fallible and we shall see...

In other words, prove the biblical definition of being all knowing includes fallibility by necessity.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

So you agree that God is fallible?

You tell me how the biblical definition of HIS being all knowing makes HIM fallible and we shall see...

In other words, prove the biblical definition of being all knowing includes fallibility by necessity.

If we are going to rely to what the Bible tells us about God, then God manages to be both omnipotent AND fails to achieve what He intends to achieve.

Rev.19
[6] And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

Genesis 6:
[6] And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
[7] And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

The Bible is self contradictory... proof positive that it is NOT the inerrant Word of God. Not that proof positive can ever be expected to change the minds of fully indoctrinated believers.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Tired of the Nonsense]

I said there were some stories of people being swallowed by whales and surviving whether they are true or not I do not know and do not care.

Because both events are miracle events. In which energy outside of this universe is added to this universe to preform a task. Just like the "Big Bang theory" and biogenesis is for you. Both break established scientific laws for a belief that you have.

Now before you start to tell me how many distinguished scientist believe in the big bang theory and biogenesis. Stop, because it really does not matter how many people are in your religion. I can name many scientist that hold credentials for prestigious universities that would agree with me.

Until they discover where the energy came from to create this universe the "Big Bang" theory violates the law of conservation of energy. Until we have life coming from chemicals, naturalistic evolution breaks the law of biogenesis. This means that they are beliefs of the highest magnitude.

By contrast the Characteristics that the God of the Bible would have to have in order to create a universe like the one we live in. Matches perfectly with the God that is described in the Bible. So come and talk to me when you have a theory that does not break known laws of science.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 23 by EarthScienceguy]

I said there were some stories of people being swallowed by whales and surviving whether they are true or not I do not know and do not care.

Because both events are miracle events. In which energy outside of this universe is added to this universe to perform a task. Just like the "Big Bang theory" and biogenesis is for you. Both break established scientific laws for a belief that you have.

Does it occur to you that such "miracle events" are suspiciously close to make believe? Whether these stories are true or not makes little difference I suppose, unless one chooses to suppose that the world really operates in accordance with make believe. Because people who truly believe that the world operates in accordance with make believe are subject to making tragic decisions.

EXPRESS.CO.UK

Pastor EATEN by crocodiles trying to walk on water

Jonathan Mthethwa was killed by three crocodiles as he carried out a religious demonstration in Zimbabwe.

Shocked witnesses said the clergyman had “prayed the whole week� before the stunt went tragically wrong.

He had also fasted in the lead-up to the attempted miracle, which was inspired by a Biblical tale of Jesus walking on water during a storm.

Horrified members of the Saint of the Last Days Church said the pastor was completely devoured in a “couple of minutes�.

He promised he would demonstrate his faith to us today, but he unfortunately ended up drowning and getting eaten

He had waded around 30 metres into what was known locally as 'Crocodile River'. At this point he had promised his congregation he would rise up above the water.

Instead he was brutally attacked by a group of crocodiles who had been hidden in the deep water.

Deacon Nkosi said: “The pastor taught us about faith on Sunday last week.

“He promised he would demonstrate his faith to us today, but he unfortunately ended up drowning and getting eaten by three large crocodiles in front of us.


The attack occurred when the pastor was attempting to walk on water
“We still don’t understand how this happened because he fasted and prayed the whole week.�

He said his death was quick and brutal.

Mr Nkosi said: “They finished him in a couple of minutes.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/80 ... n-Mthethwa

Christian snake dancers.


Living in a world of make believe is NOT harmless.

Now before you start to tell me how many distinguished scientist believe in the big bang theory and biogenesis. Stop, because it really does not matter how many people are in your religion. I can name many that would agree with me.

I wish you would supply me with the list of scientists that hold credentials for prestigious universities that deny the big bang theory and biogenesis. Because I have heard this claim time and again, but the list inevitably turns out to be woefully short. Wikipedia has a page listing various individuals of various religions that have become atheists. And it is extensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... _nontheism

I should also point out that atheism is NOT a religion. Atheism is the LACK of religious belief. Declaring atheism to be an alternate kind of religion is part of the make believe world that believers inhabit. During your visit to DC&R, if you learn nothing else, at least try to understand that atheism is not a form of religion. Neither is it a form Satanism. Nor are Atheists individuals who have a grudge against God. Atheists in fact tend to have a very thorough knowledge of Christianity, what Christians believe and why. Better than many Christians in fact.

NPR
Survey: Atheists, Agnostics Know More About Religion Than Religious
September 28, 20102:50 PM ET
JJ SUTHERLAND

The Pew Forum on Religious Religion and Public Life released a survey on religious knowledge today. Atheists and Agnostics scored higher on it than anyone else, closely followed by Jews and Mormons.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... -religious

Christians, on the other hand, often have a view of atheists and atheism that they have largely made up and developed on their own. In other words, make believe.

All genuine religions have a certain common thread. And that is some appeal, some notion, that there exists a supernatural element. All genuine religions are founded on the assumption of the existence of the supernatural, that the supernatural interacts with the human realm, and that humans can interact with the supernatural through right actions. Atheists have no such belief! REALLY! If you try to understand and accept that concept you will at least have some basis for understanding where atheist are coming from, in the same way that atheists understand where believers are coming from.

Until they discover where the energy came from to create this universe the "Big Bang" theory violates the law of conservation of energy. Until we have life coming from chemicals, naturalistic evolution breaks the law of biogenesis. This means that they are beliefs of the highest magnitude.

If this is true, than the existence of God violates the law of conservation of energy. Because we are faced with two possibilities; one is that something simply popped into existence where nothing had existed previously, and the other possibility is that "something" has always existed. Has God existed eternally? Is that possible?

The law of conservation of energy states:

Wikipedia
Conservation of Energy (physics)
energy can neither be created nor destroyed; rather, it can only be transformed or transferred from one form to another.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

If energy can neither be created or destroyed it is eternal. Which sounds very much like the claim that God has existed eternally. The difference is that the law of conservation of energy was formulated after centuries of observation and experimentation. The concept of God has been entirely derived from assumption and imagination.Make believe!

To be fair, the ancient people that made up the idea of the various gods were unaware that energy can neither be created or destroyed. The ancient people that made up the idea of the various gods were unaware of E=MC². E=MC² tells us that energy (E) and mass or matter (M) are equivalent. Matter IS ENERGY, in a concentrated form. And ancient people had no concept of quantum mechanics, which explains how and why matter interacts with itself, causing change. So ancient people made up stories about gods to explain things that they had no means, at that time, of explaining. We have the means to explain it NOW, however.

Unfortunately, the explanation does not include claims that humans maintain a special place in the universe, or that humans have an invisible "essence," and that when humans die this invisible "essence" will go to an invisible place to be with invisible friends. That is a part of the make believe world that many people prefer to inhabit. And I an sorry, I am not a worn out belief salesman offering you a better deal on a model called atheism. It is observed that all living things die. Make believe is not being offered, because make believe has no effect on reality.

By contrast the Characteristics that the God of the Bible would have to have in order to create a universe like the one we live in. Matches perfectly with the God that is described in the Bible. So come and talk to me when you have a theory that does not break known laws of science.

The "characteristics" of the God of the Bible are self Contradictory. Is the God of the Bible omnipotent?

Rev.19
[6] And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

Or is the God of the Bible fallible?

Genesis 6:
and it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
[7] And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.


Observation of the universe we live in indicates that matter/energy interacts with itself in predictable ways known as the laws of physics. The laws of Physics are not self contradictory. Which is why today we have working technology, and the ancients, who did not have a concept of physics, tended to live in mud huts. With no electric lights, TV's or air conditioning.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 24 by Tired of the Nonsense]

Christians, on the other hand, often have a view of atheists and atheism that they have largely made up and developed on their own. In other words, make believe.

Amen! It is really amazing how many people don't understand the simple position of atheism. Too many people associate it with being anti-religion, or being a "devil worshiper" (not understanding that devils are just as unlikely to exist as gods to an atheist), etc. And this all-too-common reference to scientific materialism as a "religion" requiring faith is just another cop-out tossed into the argument to try and discredit whatever point is objectionable to the theist, of course without any support behind it.

Make believe has the luxury of an infinite number of options, none of which require any evidence or proof to support them. Fortunately the real world does not operate on make believe, so we have the conveniences and technologies of the modern world, and a far greater understanding of how things actually do work, both on this planet and beyond.

[EarthScienceguy]

The fossil record matches perfectly with what the Bible says should happen. Evolution not so much.

But regardless of whether you believe in evolution or not.

The Bible gives a beginning mechanism and cause of the the creation of this universe that does make predictions and observations fit the predictions that it makes.

The Bible gives a beginning mechanism and cause for life here on earth that makes predictions and observations fit the predictions.


Evolution gives no beginning mechanism and cause for life here on Earth. And you would expect someone to believe evolution when
According to evolution models for the fossil record, there are three predictions:

• 1. wholesale change of organisms through time
  2. primitive organisms gave rise to complex organisms
  3. gradual derivation of new organisms produced transitional forms.

This is what we find

1. Evolution is not taking place right now.
a. An evolutionary biologist at the University of Oslo, Kjetil Lysne Voje, offers an explanation for stasis:

The most wide-spread explanation is stabilising selection. It suggests that the advantage for a species which is already well adapted to its environment will be to avoid changing much. It is a type of natural selection that favours the average individuals in a population because changes are disadvantageous. Changes are a drawback and stabilising selection will discard deviations from the well-functioning norm.

“Stabilising selection is a very good explanation for stasis, as it helps a species remain unchanged. But it has some problems, as it is hard to conceive of an optimal form that would not change in the course of millions of years,� says Voje.

b. Evolutionary biologist Donald Prothero admits:

In four of the biggest climatic-vegetational events of the last 50 million years, the mammals and birds show no noticeable change in response to changing climates. No matter how many presentations I give where I show these data, no one (including myself) has a good explanation yet for such widespread stasis despite the obvious selective pressures of changing climate.

2. Evolution never happen in the past

a. Evolutionary theory predicts that the Morphological Distance should spread out like a tree. But that is not what we see in the fossil record. At the Cambrian Explosion most of the phyla that we see today and some phyla that we do not see today where in existence.




3. Evolution could have never happen

a. Evolution violates thermodynamics

b. The ratio of “Beneficial genetic� changes to harmful mutations is 10,000 to 1. And even these so called Beneficial mutations have downsides. So even if there is 1 beneficial mutation with not down side (which there is not) then the next 10,000 will be destroy the organism. This seems to support the idea that the evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics and the idea that it ever took place at all.

c. This ratio would make the Cambrian explosion an impossible event. And this ratio is calling "Equivocally Beneficial mutations(meaning they have a downside but they do not kill the organism)" beneficial mutations.

Common on really Evolution. You might as well say that some goofy freckled faced alien created all of this. (Oh, wait you do have a theory that says that.)

So really what is so superior about your position.

Your theories break known and established laws and the observations that we make today make your position untenable.

If you would like to believe evolution happens on faith you go right ahead. But the observational evidence is not there.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 26 by EarthScienceguy]

If you would like to believe evolution happens on faith you go right ahead. But the observational evidence is not there.

Virtually everything you said in this post is demonstrably wrong so I won't waste time trying to debunk every single point (which is very easily done, and has been by the last 150+ years of actual science). But if you really think the stories of the bible have any relation to reality it is probably impossible to get through to you that they don't.

You may be in the Ken Ham category in that no amount of real evidence and science could convince you that your position is wrong, but it is also true that no amount of false statements like "evolution isn't happening now" (really ... do you actually believe that?) can change the course of science and make the biblical myths true. They simply do not jive with what we do know about history, the diversification of life on earth, etc., and can never be twisted enough to be compatible with real, observational science.

Lastly, the mechanism for the origin of life on earth has absolutely nothing to do with the theory of evolution (TOE), and the TOE has no need to explain that mechanism whatever it turns out to be. This is just another demonstration of a gross misunderstanding of what TOE really is.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 26 by EarthScienceguy]

The fossil record matches perfectly with what the Bible says should happen. Evolution not so much.

But regardless of whether you believe in evolution or not.

The Bible gives a beginning mechanism and cause of the the creation of this universe that does make predictions and observations fit the predictions that it makes.

The Bible gives a beginning mechanism and cause for life here on earth that makes predictions and observations fit the predictions.

Other than the part about the Bible indicating that the Earth and the universe are only a few thousand years old, you mean? Do you actually consider the Flintstones to be "a page right out of history?"

Evolution gives no beginning mechanism and cause for life here on Earth.

The mechanism for the cause of life here on Earth is the same mechanism that causes all change. It's called quantum mechanics. Your computer works on the principle of 0 or one. Off or on. Quantum mechanics works on a similar principle of positive or negative. Attraction or repulsion.

And you would expect someone to believe evolution when

According to evolution models for the fossil record, there are three predictions:
1. wholesale change of organisms through time

Like this, you mean?

Homo Hablis Skull


Neanderthal Skull


Human Skull

2. primitive organisms gave rise to complex organisms

Like this you mean?

Amoeba


Planarian


Anaconda

3. gradual derivation of new organisms produced transitional forms.

Like this you mean?

Primative Ear of Corn.



Modern Ear of Corn.



We humans have artifically selected for big, juicy ears of corn by continuously selecting those traits we prefer and then cultivating the type that have the traits we value. We have done the same thing to dogs. Each successive generation represents a "transitional stage."

This is what we find

1. Evolution is not taking place right now.

A expected lifespan of a modern human is typically 80 years or so. Up from about age fifty in 1900. What exactly does the word "gradual" mean to you? For large creatures that reproduce slowly and live for years, evolutionary change can only be expected to become apparent over the course of tens of thousands of years. The real question of course is, "are humans evolving?" Humans are rapidly diversifying. But we have not evolved into separate species over the course of the last 10,000-15,000 years. Will that happen? Only if human populations undergo long periods of isolation from each other, and the populations become much smaller and are under pressure to survive. What we are currently witnessing in the human population is simple diversification. Because humans are very good at surviving long enough to reproduce.

But what about other types of creatures with faster reproductive cycles?

SCIENCENEWS
Researchers have caught fruit fly evolution in flagrante delicto.

More specifically, in flagrante delicto Y, a newly described gene on the fruit fly Y chromosome. The gene appears to have been copied onto the sex chromosome from another fly chromosome around 2 million years ago, scientists report September 14 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Flagrante delicto Y is 98 percent identical to the gene from which it was copied, and the researchers believe that the new gene has a similar function: helping organize cells’ genetic material. Unlike its predecessor, flagrante delicto Y is expressed mainly in the testes.

The gene earned its scandalous moniker by providing concrete evidence of how Drosophila melanogaster’s Y chromosome picks up genes from other chromosomes. “Smoking gun Y� would have also been fitting, says study coauthor A. Bernardo Carvalho, a geneticist at the Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Adding genes allows the fly’s Y chromosome to grow larger and attain new abilities over millions of years. An opposite trend occurs in mammals’ Y chromosomes, which tend to lose genetic material as they evolve.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/evo ... red-handed

Evolution takes place at different rates for different species.

a. An evolutionary biologist at the University of Oslo, Kjetil Lysne Voje, offers an explanation for stasis:

Quote:
The most wide-spread explanation is stabilising selection. It suggests that the advantage for a species which is already well adapted to its environment will be to avoid changing much. It is a type of natural selection that favours the average individuals in a population because changes are disadvantageous. Changes are a drawback and stabilising selection will discard deviations from the well-functioning norm.

“Stabilising selection is a very good explanation for stasis, as it helps a species remain unchanged. But it has some problems, as it is hard to conceive of an optimal form that would not change in the course of millions of years,� says Voje.

Humans are a classic example of having a stable population. Human are so successful at surviving to the age of reproduction that we risk populating ourselves into instability.

b. Evolutionary biologist Donald Prothero admits:
Quote:
In four of the biggest climatic-vegetational events of the last 50 million years, the mammals and birds show no noticeable change in response to changing climates. No matter how many presentations I give where I show these data, no one (including myself) has a good explanation yet for such widespread stasis despite the obvious selective pressures of changing climate.

When was the last ice age?
"The Pleistocene Epoch is typically defined as the time period that began about 2.6 million years ago and lasted until about 11,700 years ago. The most recent Ice Age occurred then, as glaciers covered huge parts of the planet Earth."
https://www.google.com/search?q=when+wa ... e&ie=UTF-8

How big was the global human population 12,000 years ago?

Wikipedia
World Population Estimates
Some estimates extend their timeline into deep prehistory, to "10,000 BC", i.e. the early Holocene, when world population estimates range roughly between one and ten million (with an uncertainty of up to an order of magnitude).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_pop ... _estimates

What is the human population today.

Wikipedia
Population estimates cannot be considered accurate to more than two decimal digits; for example, world population for the year 2012 was estimated at 7.02, 7.06 and 7.08 billion by the United States Census Bureau, the Population Reference Bureau and the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, respectively, corresponding to a spread of estimates of the order of 0.8%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_pop ... _estimates

The answer, in case you missed it, is that the human population 12,000 years ago was 1 to 10 million. The human population today is 7+ billion.

2. Evolution never happen in the past

FOSSILS!



This is Sue. She (it) is 90% complete and is the most complete T-Rex fossil ever discovered.

a. Evolutionary theory predicts that the Morphological Distance should spread out like a tree. But that is not what we see in the fossil record. At the Cambrian Explosion most of the phyla that we see today and some phyla that we do not see today where in existence.

You do understand that fossils are rare and difficult to find, I hope?

The facts we know about organisms that lived millions of years ago are found in fossils. Fossils are the remains left behind by an organism. Fossils are usually found within rocks of the Earth's crust. We know that organisms have evolved and changed over the years because of the clues that fossils give us.
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GG ... U-jMamt_7I

How rare are fossils?
The new rock that forms contains new fossils. So, much of the earth's surface is recent, compared to the age of the planet itself. Old rocks are rare, so of course old fossils are rare too. The second reason is that many old rocks have spent time buried.
https://www.google.com/search?q=rarity+ ... e&ie=UTF-8

Earth Science
Why are fossils rare?
Jun 22, 2015
Answer:
Fossils are rare because certain conditions are needed to preserve an organism in order for it to fossilize, and those conditions themselves are rare.
https://socratic.org/questions/why-are-fossils-rare

3. Evolution could have never happen

a. Evolution violates thermodynamics

Thermodynamics is is almost universally misunderstood and misused by novices.

Wikipedia
Thermodynamics
Thermodynamics is the branch of physics concerned with heat and temperature and their relation to energy and work. The behavior of these quantities is governed by the four laws of thermodynamics, irrespective of the composition or specific properties of the material or system in question. The laws of thermodynamics are explained in terms of microscopic constituents by statistical mechanics. Thermodynamics applies to a wide variety of topics in science and engineering, especially physical chemistry, chemical engineering and mechanical engineering.

Basically, the law of thermodynamics indicates that heat energy will reach a state of equilibrium in a closed system. So, first we must define a close system. Does the Earth reside in a closed system? NO! The Earth is situated about 90 million miles away from a massive source of energy called the SUN, which pours energy on the Earth 24-7, 365. Evolution most emphatically DOES NOT violate the laws of thermodynamics.

b. The ratio of “Beneficial genetic� changes to harmful mutations is 10,000 to 1. And even these so called Beneficial mutations have downsides. So even if there is 1 beneficial mutation with not down side (which there is not) then the next 10,000 will be destroy the organism. This seems to support the idea that the evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics and the idea that it ever took place at all.

GENOME RESEARCH

Comparing the human and chimpanzee genomes: Searching for needles in a haystack
Ajit Varki1 and Tasha K. Altheide

Glycobiology Research and Training Center, Departments of Medicine and Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA

The chimpanzee genome sequence is a long-awaited milestone, providing opportunities to explore primate evolution and genetic contributions to human physiology and disease. Humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor ~5-7 million years ago (Mya). The difference between the two genomes is actually not ~1%, but ~4%—comprising ~35 million single nucleotide differences and ~90 Mb of insertions and deletions.

Copyright © 2017 by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1746.full

Muscle for muscle, bone for bone, organ for organ, humans are apes. Humans and apes shared a common ancestor a few million years ago. A few million years earlier even still, humans and chimps shared a common ancestor with gorillas and orangutans.

Common on really Evolution. You might as well say that some goofy freckled faced alien created all of this. (Oh, wait you do have a theory that says that.)

Do I suppose that there are other intelligent creatures in the universe? Given the vast nature of the universe, it's difficult to reach any other conclusion. But the universe is really REALLY big. There is no actual evidence that the Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials. It's more likely to be true than stories of flying reanimated corpses, however.

What you are espousing here is not science. It contradicts all established science and is nothing more than purposely arranged propaganda designed to reach a desired conclusion which supports a particular dogma known as religion.

[ttruscott]

Rev.19
[6] And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

Genesis 6:
[6] And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

That you think HIS goal was not met is immaterial - HIS goal was to have everyone choose by their free will to accept HIS deity and put their faith in HIS Son OR to choose by their free will to reject HIS deity and put their faith in anything except HIS Son. Some joned HIS as HIS Bride and some rejected HIM as a false GOD; ie, no one got to sit on the fence and wait it out to see what happened.

Such was HIS goal and scuh was what happened. HIS sorrow over the fact that sin had to be dealt with so HE had to invent humans is the solution to HIS problem of people choosing to be evil; NOT A FAILURE OF HIS PURPOSE!

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Rev.19
[6] And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

Genesis 6:
[6] And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

That you think HIS goal was not met is immaterial - HIS goal was to have everyone choose by their free will to accept HIS deity and put their faith in HIS Son OR to choose by their free will to reject HIS deity and put their faith in anything except HIS Son. Some joned HIS as HIS Bride and some rejected HIM as a false GOD; ie, no one got to sit on the fence and wait it out to see what happened.

Such was HIS goal and scuh was what happened. HIS sorrow over the fact that sin had to be dealt with so HE had to invent humans is the solution to HIS problem of people choosing to be evil; NOT A FAILURE OF HIS PURPOSE!

Let's stop RIGHT HERE! Before we proceed any further, I demand that you provide evidence that God has promised anyone free will.