|Did God err in even creating us?|
A Skeptic once said:
A PERFECT God created a human, who wanted to sin right from the start. That's funny, I'd expect ANYTHING created by a perfect God would itself be perfect. And if Adam wanted to sin right away, he was not perfect. He could have had all the freewill in the cosmos and if, like Jesus, he were perfect he would not have wanted to sin.
I'm checking all references to Adam here, and I don't see any indication that Adam wanted to sin "from the start" -- no time frame is given in the text; for all we know, the Temptation may have happened years after the moment of creation. Nor do I see where Adam "wanted" to sin -- where is this indicated? Does anyone out there "want" to sin if they know better?
Of more relevance, how can "perfection" of a created being result necessarily in perfection of the choices they make? Does "perfection" imply the life of an automaton? Does "perfection" mean a lack of liberty? Is it more "perfect" to be controlled than to be free? (Don't tell our friends in 1776 that.)
I can see where Adam could be said to have been created "innocent" in this regard, but how does one achieve "perfection" this way? This objection is a case of apples chasing oranges -- and I regard it as the same as a robber blaming a bank for having money for him to steal.(For more on this subject, see Glenn Miller's item here.)
Finally, let me close with an observation regarding what is said about Jesus. I have a personal view of the matter of the burning question, "Could Jesus have failed the Temptations?" that is different than some may have heard.
No, I don't think Jesus could have failed -- not in the least. Someone will say, "Well, so what did the temptations prove, then?"
I'll explain what they proved with an analogy. Let us recall the story of the Sphinx (pictured to the left): Persons approaching this creature were required to answer a riddle posed by it in order to pass. Losers were summarily dispatched. The only way to get past it was to answer the riddle -- right?
Well, let's say that rather than answer the riddle, one of these Greek fellows stopped by the time travel surplus store, and instead of answering the riddle, blew the Sphinx away with a howitzer.
So did he defeat the Sphinx? Of course he did. And he did so by rendering the Sphinx's challenge irrelevant.
As I see it, this is what the purpose of the Temptation of Jesus was -- it was to prove Satan to be irrelevant in context. Jesus experienced temptation firsthand (Hebrews 4:15) and knew what it was like, but this is not the same thing as saying that he could have fallen for it (and as Hebrews goes on to say, he didn't fall for it -- cf. Hebrews 2:17-18: "Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted." ).
A Greek could hear the Sphinx's riddle, and say, "Yeah, so what?" before blowing the beast to smithereens. In the same way, Jesus was tested, and was guaranteed a 100%. The Temptation was a glorious demonstration of what the Incarnation had accomplished.