Yes, those people were Christians, I don't know what you're trying to say. The Israelites (like in Numbers) were not "Christians" as the term could be defined, since they did not have the New Covenant, they had the Old Covenant. The New Covenant is what would make someone a "Christian", since it is the only covenant, having superceded the Old Covenant, and it requires that one follows Christ and accepts His gift.
We aren't being punished specifically because of the apple, we're being punished because of the effect of that sin that made us sinful and that fell the universe into evil. If the government locks up a schizophrenic man in jail for killing someone, even if he may've thought of his action as innocent because of how he saw it within his mental condition, he still violated the law, despite not being able to help it because of how schizophrenic and mentally unwell he naturally was. Similarly, we're naturally evil, terrible people, but Christ's gift absolves us of the punishment for the evil that we have done and that we will do for as long as we believe in He as God and as our savior from this punishment with truth in our hearts of His moral superiority that we make an active effort to follow. God is not evil because, simply put, God is the definer of all that is evil and all that is good, and we are morally inferior to Him because we are not of His infinite power, so all that He wills is meant to happen, even if things that do happen are, obviously, bad and cause suffering, for in the end it still contributes to the plan of The Lord to guide people to Him. The Crusades are a whole other thing, but, in the simplest terms, if a man actively chose to do what you speak, of slaughtering thousands of innocent people in the name of The Lord, or razing entire cities and communities, he was not a true follower of Christ even if he proclaimed himself as such, because he did not actively follow the will of Christ because he commit such evils. If he was a true believer, Christ and belief in the faith would have such a profound impact on him that he would not dare commit such things all willy-nilly, as you say these people would.
>Yes, those people were Christians, I don't know what you're trying to say. The Israelites (like in Numbers) were not "Christians" as the term could be defined, since they did not have the New Covenant, they had the Old Covenant. The New Covenant is what would make someone a "Christian", since it is the only covenant, having superceded the Old Covenant, and it requires that one follows Christ and accepts His gift.
My point is that you follow the same god.
>We aren't being punished specifically because of the apple, we're being punished because of the effect of that sin that made
us sinful and that fell the universe into evil.
Something that man has no responsibility over. He still chose to put the apple, adam and eve all there knowing all this would happen. He chose to create mankind knowing he'd have to exil adam and eve from the garden of eden, knowing he'd flood the world after becoming disgusted with man knowing every terrible thing would happen. He did all of this just to have people to grovel at his feet and whine about how evil they are and how much they need him. It's disgusting.
>If the government locks up a schizophrenic man in jail for killing someone, even if he may've thought of his action as innocent because of how he saw it within his mental condition, he still violated the law, despite not being able to help it because of how schizophrenic and mentally unwell he naturally was.
I do not see the correlation between being born "corrupted" and being schizophrenic. If you're gonna say "well you can't understand god's perspective" I hope you understand that that's not very convincing.
>Similarly, we're naturally evil, terrible people, but Christ's gift absolves us of the punishment for the evil that we have done and that we will do for as long as we believe in He as God and as our savior from this punishment with truth in our hearts of His moral superiority that we make an active effort to follow.
Dogma. Meaningless buzzing. There is nothing to suggest such a thing as human nature exists.
>God is not evil because, simply put, God is the definer of all that is evil and all that is good, and we are morally inferior to Him because we are not of His infinite power
No. I can define my own good and evil (which are abstractions) so that is easily proven false. There is nothing to prove that his morals are objective, only if you already believe in him.
>we are morally inferior to Him because we are not of His infinite power
What do you mean by this? That he is omniscient? Again this is relevant only if you already believe this to be true.
>so all that He wills is meant to happen, even if things that do happen are, obviously, bad and cause suffering, for in the end it still contributes to the plan of The Lord to guide people to Him.
So a child being born with a horrible disfigurement and suffering for hours until it dies is all part of the plan and is completely necessary for.... Something? What exactly? Why exactly is that necessary and what exactly is his plan leading to? The only answer being "We cannot understand, you must have faith" is disappointing. I've heard it a million times over.
>The Crusades are a whole other thing, but, in the simplest terms, if a man actively chose to do what you speak, of slaughtering thousands of innocent people in the name of The Lord, or razing entire cities and communities, he was not a true follower of Christ even if he proclaimed himself as such, because he did not actively follow the will of Christ because he commit such evils. If he was a true believer, Christ and belief in the faith would have such a profound impact on him that he would not dare commit such things all willy-nilly, as you say these people would.
Then god should have made his text clearer on this subject. Surely you'd understand that someone would get the wrong idea when they see the similar atrocities god permits and even orders in the bible. As one example 1 Samuel 15:2 to 3.
