Diseases

[RedFox]

I put this in a new thread because it's a different subject.

All disease, not just mental illness, ties into the original sin. It is a result of Adam's sin, as is the sin nature of man. It is not a result of the sin nature, it is in the same package as the sin nature. saying that would be like saying that the motherboard's functioning is a result of the monitor turning on. Now, the people who say that mental illness is a punishment for your own sin, or a sin in itself, are, sadly, a dangerous minority of Christians.

Who decided on the punishment for the original sin? It was the god, but I don't see anything specific in Genesis 3 about all species getting diseases. What I see is the god cursing the ground to make it not grow a lot of plants, making Adam need to work the ground.

If diseases come from the original sin, explain how bacteria, viruses, defective versions of genes, protists, fungi and prions that cause diseases were created by Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit of a tree that the omniscientist god planted in the garden in the first place, knowing full well what would result from that. If only humans sinned, why are there diseases that affect other animals and plants? Bacteria can even be inflected by viruses. Some of them could jump to humans, but plenty can't. I've not heard of anyone getting distemper from their pets or black rot from plants.

Do not use free will because being omniscientist means knowing everything, including what choices people will use their free will to make.

If the disease causing things were created in this 'curse' then how come we can compare their genes and find how they're related? And what about other little things that don't cause disease? And what about the ones that are helpful sometimes and sometimes cause disease?

For example, Escherichia coli helps digestion in the intestines, but if it gets out of there, it makes you sick. Does this mean that the E. coli didn't exist before the original sin, making it harder for people to digest things? Adding it where it is helpful seems like an odd punishment.

There's also cyanobacteria that can make cyanotoxins, but are important suppliers of oxygen. Not having that before the 'curse' would mean much less oxygen generation capacity.

Saying all diseases would include diseases of other species, so how does bitting a fruit make all kinds of organisms get infected? That's a lot of hocus pocus and the one character in the position to do that much abracadabra in the Adam & Eve story is the god. So if the god inflected all of his own creation for the misbehavior of only two members, it's not so surprising that people say that this god hates his own creation.

 

[Maria]

I put this in a new thread because it's a different subject.

Who decided on the punishment for the original sin? It was the god, but I don't see anything specific in Genesis 3 about all species getting diseases. What I see is the god cursing the ground to make it not grow a lot of plants, making Adam need to work the ground.

The first disease came when Eve ate a fruit and thus became a sin, because of disobedience. And, secondly came Cain who murdered his own brother, Abel. By bein' murderer is related to mental problem - Cain was envy of his brother who sacrificed sheep/lamb to God as God favored Abel instead of Cain, because Cain sacrificed God his vegetables which don't shed blood to forgive sins. After God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Eden Garden, He made them to work hard on their own by makin' their own crops and so forth.

If diseases come from the original sin, explain how bacteria, viruses, defective versions of genes, protists, fungi and prions that cause diseases were created by Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit of a tree that the omniscientist god planted in the garden in the first place, knowing full well what would result from that. If only humans sinned, why are there diseases that affect other animals and plants? Bacteria can even be inflected by viruses. Some of them could jump to humans, but plenty can't. I've not heard of anyone getting distemper from their pets or black rot from plants.

I don't think there was ever any diseases that came from animals, plants or anythin' like that in Adam and Eve's ancient times. They were very robust, strong and healthy people. They eat healthy foods as well. God provided them herbs ( plants ) to eat. They lived for over 100 years of age.

Do not use free will because being omniscientist means knowing everything, including what choices people will use their free will to make.

If the disease causing things were created in this 'curse' then how come we can compare their genes and find how they're related? And what about other little things that don't cause disease? And what about the ones that are helpful sometimes and sometimes cause disease?

To compare of today to ancient times, we have very dirty waters, dirty pollutions, dirty air, and everythin' we live in every day... it could cause some people to get sick. For example : Some companies ( meat butchers ) put hormones/antibotics in meats ( cow, pork and pigs ) that are unhealthy. Sometimes, it could cause some cancers in some people. The meats' blood could contain some germs where the live cows/pigs ate on the outside ... I mean, we won't know what's in cows/pigs' bodies. For example: Mad cow and what caused them disease ? And, from what ? In Adam and Eve's ancient times don't have that kind of like this as we have today. It's why God warned not to eat " blood " meats.

For example, Escherichia coli helps digestion in the intestines, but if it gets out of there, it makes you sick. Does this mean that the E. coli didn't exist before the original sin, making it harder for people to digest things? Adding it where it is helpful seems like an odd punishment.

There's also cyanobacteria that can make cyanotoxins, but are important suppliers of oxygen. Not having that before the 'curse' would mean much less oxygen generation capacity.

God created lots, lots of trees that supplied oxygen. It was a man who cut them ( trees ) down could means to harm people's health. It wasn't God's doin' it.

Saying all diseases would include diseases of other species, so how does bitting a fruit make all kinds of organisms get infected? That's a lot of hocus pocus and the one character in the position to do that much abracadabra in the Adam & Eve story is the god. So if the god inflected all of his own creation for the misbehavior of only two members, it's not so surprising that people say that this god hates his own creation.

God warned Adam and Eve NOT to eat that fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, otherwise they both will die ( sin ). It was Satan/the devil ( the serpent ) who told Eve :
" Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowin' good and evil. " Genesis 3:5

Whooa ! Satan was more subtil than any beast of the field. He surely knows how to prey just like a wolf would to sheep in the field, eh ? EH ? He still used that evil scheme to people today.

 

[RedFox]

God warned Adam and Eve NOT to eat that fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, otherwise they both will die ( sin ). It was Satan/the devil ( the serpent ) who told Eve :
" Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowin' good and evil. " Genesis 3:5

Whooa ! Satan was more subtil than any beast of the field. He surely knows how to prey just like a wolf would to sheep in the field, eh ? EH ? He still used that evil scheme to people today.

Didn't you see what I said about what omniscience on the part of the god would mean? I said that if the god knows everything, then when he was planting the tree in the garden, he knew that Adam and Eve would eat the fruit. Then why did he do it anyway? Do not use the free will weaseling because knowing everything would entail knowing what people use their free will to do.

Another possiblity is that the god was not omniscientist, allowing for free will. That would permit him to learn, which is what seems to happen when he found Adam and Eve after they ate the fruit. That means the god is not unchanging because learning is a kind of change.

Yet another possiblity is that it's all a myth.

Genesis 3 looks like it provided an answer to ancient people to why snakes do not have legs. Remember that this is supposed to be the beginning of the world with only two people, so it could be supposed that the snake Eve talked with was one of the few snakes in existence if there were any others. So having only a few snakes would be fitting with the short time after creation.

There is nothing in Genesis 3 to show that the snake is anything other than one of the first snakes, rather than Satan himself. If the ancient people considered that snake to be Satan like modern Christians do, then that would mean Creationists would have to admit that their beliefs imply that all snakes are descendants of Satan and should be considered evil. Yet snakes are important parts of the food web because they keep the rodent population under control, rather than eating dust as the god 'cursed' them to do.

People are often scared of snakes, so it's not surprising that this got incorporated into a story that portrays it as evil.

It seems like that people think that the snake is Satan because of how Paul used the example of the snake and Eve in 2 Corinthians 11 to warn people about being corrupted. There's nothing that explicitly says the snake was Satan. So how do you differentiate between the snake being Satan himself, a puppet of Satan, a worker for Satan, an independent evil creature that is just used as an analogy by Paul, or an early mythical snake whose misdeeds are said to explain snakes' lack of limbs and the fear people have for them?

There's also the issue of different kinds of snakes. I don't know how many species live in the Middle East, but I'd not be surprised if the ancient people thought that they were all descendants of the snake in the garden, because that would explain, in their minds, why they don't have limbs.

In the story, it was god who decided to 'curse' the earth, rather than doing something else, like punishing Adam and Eve in a way that didn't affect the whole earth. Why would the god do that if he didn't hate his own creation?

And please try to explain how all of those disease causing things could have resulted from just eating a fruit, including diseases that don't affect humans. And don't forget to explain the issues of organisms like Escherichia coli and cyanobacteria that are both good and bad. Didn't the animals, Adam and Eve have E. coli to help them digest food? If that got out of their guts, they'd have gotten sick, regardless of if the god had 'cursed' the earth yet or not. There are also other bacteria in the guts of some animals like horses and rabbits and termites that are required for their proper functioning. Getting those bacteria out of the guts would be a bad idea. So either those bacteria were around before the 'curse' and it was possible to get sick from them, or the animals and people found it hard or impossible to digest food. Or the whole story could be a myth made up by Bronze age people who knew less about the world than we do.

 

[christlovedeaf]

Remember, what Satan ask God about Job? Remember what Paul described Satan as angel of light? Satan is great deceptor. He knows how to do anything and even Satan quote scriptures to Jesus. There no other way to look at beside freewill. God is not a force. Yes, God is omniscience. And knowing all the future and same times, God provide the way to give us salvation. Our mind are soooo limited, there is so much we couldn't see how God does that. And Satan try everyway to keep hold of us to be destroyed bec he knows where he will be going, so that's why God provide us a way to be with Him.

 

[Reba]

Who decided on the punishment for the original sin?

God.

...I don't see anything specific in Genesis 3 about all species getting diseases. What I see is the god cursing the ground to make it not grow a lot of plants, making Adam need to work the ground.

By cursing the land and vegetation, it effected the quality of life for the animals too, especially domesticated animals. The whole food chain was impacted. Also, after the Flood, the entire atmosphere changed. The protective atmospheric canopy was gone.

All species on earth are effected by the curse but not all creatures of all species are physically "diseased" at all times. The agents of disease were probably always present in benign form but became destructive after many of the protections and immunities were removed after the Fall, and intensified after the Flood. (Just my opinion.)

... If only humans sinned, why are there diseases that affect other animals and plants? Bacteria can even be inflected by viruses. Some of them could jump to humans, but plenty can't. I've not heard of anyone getting distemper from their pets or black rot from plants.

God designed the earth and everything living on it for a system to support Man, and to be cared for by Man. As a means of punishing Man for his sin, God began the process of decline in Man's physical support system, the environment. Man accelerates the process of decline thru his lack of proper stewardship of the environment (either intentional or accidental). (I'm stating this in a very broad way, I know.)

Do not use free will because being omniscientist means knowing everything, including what choices people will use their free will to make.

But will is not truly free if it has no options.

If the disease causing things were created in this 'curse' then how come we can compare their genes and find how they're related?

Nothing "new" was created after the curse. They just interacted in new ways and combinations, in new environments, which caused new reactions. For example, mosquitoes. If you put them in a cold dry climate without a food source (no mammals), they will die out. If you put them in a hot damp climate with lots of people, they will thrive. God had already created the mosquitoes during Creation week but they aren't evenly distributed over the planet.

...For example, Escherichia coli helps digestion in the intestines, but if it gets out of there, it makes you sick. Does this mean that the E. coli didn't exist before the original sin, making it harder for people to digest things? Adding it where it is helpful seems like an odd punishment.

There's also cyanobacteria that can make cyanotoxins, but are important suppliers of oxygen. Not having that before the 'curse' would mean much less oxygen generation capacity.

All those things were in existence before the Fall but only became toxic and hazardous in the changed environment after. It was changed , not made new.

... how does bitting a fruit make all kinds of organisms get infected?

Biting a fruit doesn't. God's punishment for disobedience does.

... god inflected all of his own creation for the misbehavior of only two members...

God put the initial curse on the planet but it didn't impact the entire creation immediately. That started the chain of events that rippled outward in time and space.

 

[RedFox]

Remember, what Satan ask God about Job? Remember what Paul described Satan as angel of light? Satan is great deceptor. He knows how to do anything and even Satan quote scriptures to Jesus. There no other way to look at beside freewill. God is not a force. Yes, God is omniscience. And knowing all the future and same times, God provide the way to give us salvation. Our mind are soooo limited, there is so much we couldn't see how God does that. And Satan try everyway to keep hold of us to be destroyed bec he knows where he will be going, so that's why God provide us a way to be with Him.

Satan asked the god if Job feared him. I know about Satan being called the angel of light. Just because Paul describes Satan as an angel of light to describe him as a deceiver does not mean that the snake in Genesis is Satan. Satan knowing how to quote verses isn't so unique because lots of non-Christians also know about the bible.

I did not say that the god is a force, but that doing the 'curse' takes a lot of hocus pocus on his part. If the god has the property of omniscience, that would mean that he knows what people he gave free will to would do in the future. So he had to know that planting the tree in the garden would end up with his orders being violated. That's why I said not to use the free will weasel arguement, yet you still used it and on top of that, claimed that our minds are limited and that there is big plan unknowable to us. Where did you get that idea from? It's likely that it's from other Christians. How did they get that idea? Having a lot of people who believe in an idea doesn't make it right. If the idea is from the bible, it doesn't mean that it's right. Why the bible and not other religions?

 

[RedFox]

God.

Yeah, I was pointing out that it was the god who did the punishing as part of what I said about what the property of omniscience would imply about god's knowledge and actions.

By cursing the land and vegetation, it effected the quality of life for the animals too, especially domesticated animals. The whole food chain was impacted. Also, after the Flood, the entire atmosphere changed. The protective atmospheric canopy was gone.

Where is you evidence that all of the infectious lifeforms became like that all at once in a 'curse' rather than always having been part of the biosphere for as long as it existed?

I see that you believe in Noah's flood and that it came from a canopy. Where is your evidence for that? It had been calculated that if there was that much water up there, the pressure it would have on the atmosphere below it would make the pressure too high at ground level. If the canopy was in the form of water vapor, then having it condense would release lots of latent heat of condensation, making things too hot. It'd be like the reverse process that happens when sweat evaporates and removes heat from your body. If the canopy was in solid form in orbit, then the gravitional potential energy from the ice falling to Earth would make things too hot. Either way, Noah et al. would be cooked. If the canopy was thick enough, it'd block a lot of light, like what is seen deeper down in the oceans. Below 200 meters in the sea, there isn't enough light for photosynthesis. So the canopy can't be very thick if it's liquid. And if the canopy extends above the ozone layer, which is what protects us from ultraviolet rays, then the ultraviolet rays from the sun would be able to break apart the water into hydrogen and oxygen and the hydrogen would escape.

All species on earth are effected by the curse but not all creatures of all species are physically "diseased" at all times. The agents of disease were probably always present in benign form but became destructive after many of the protections and immunities were removed after the Fall, and intensified after the Flood. (Just my opinion.)

Then how would all of the initially benign organisms gain harmful characteristics? Plants that make toxic chemicals make them for protection from insects and other things that eat them. If they didn't have the toxic stuff before the 'curse' they'd be at greater risk of extinction. Bees and snakes have venom for defense and/or using on prey. Not having venom would mean a very different lifestyle for such creatures before the 'curse.' Is there any evidence of that change lying around in the natural world?

God designed the earth and everything living on it for a system to support Man, and to be cared for by Man. As a means of punishing Man for his sin, God began the process of decline in Man's physical support system, the environment. Man accelerates the process of decline thru his lack of proper stewardship of the environment (either intentional or accidental). (I'm stating this in a very broad way, I know.)

I consider this anthropocentrism to be typical of certain kinds of religions. Those religions also put the blame for everything about the environoment that isn't to our liking on us. Does this include things like earthquakes, volcanos, tornados and hurricanes? If so, explain how the world could have functioned without those things happening before the 'curse' and how the 'curse' made those things possible.

Do not use free will because being omniscientist means knowing everything, including what choices people will use their free will to make.

But will is not truly free if it has no options.

Being omniscientist means knowing everything. Who is claimed to have this property? It's the god, not Adam and Eve. So to Adam and Eve, it would look like they still have options because they don't see everything that they'll do in the future. But the god is claimed to be omniscientist, so he has to know everything, which is what omniscience means. That includes what future actions Adam, Eve and he will do. So it's the god who does not have options. If knowledge of all future actions is excluded from the god's knowledge, then it's not omniscience because now not everything is known. So, to be omniscientist, the god would have to have known that planting the tree in the garden would lead to Adam and Eve eating the fruit. Adam and Eve could still think that they had free will and the same is true for any other human. Do you really know if you have free will on your part without a god who is trapped by his knowledge of the future?

Nothing "new" was created after the curse. They just interacted in new ways and combinations, in new environments, which caused new reactions. For example, mosquitoes. If you put them in a cold dry climate without a food source (no mammals), they will die out. If you put them in a hot damp climate with lots of people, they will thrive. God had already created the mosquitoes during Creation week but they aren't evenly distributed over the planet.

Why did the god create the mosquitos? If he's omniscientist, he'd have to know that he'd use them as part of the 'curse.' And where is the evidence that god made such species and moved them around the planet for the 'curse.' Show that the arragnement proposed for the pre-curse world would be possible.

Where would the mosquitos be before the 'curse'? They would have to be stored somewhere else away from humans along with a stock of nonhuman mammals that would be annoyed by them. Isn't that a 'curse' on those mammals?

What about the Escherichia coli that helps digestion? If they can make us sick if they get out of the gut and if things were rearrangled for the 'curse,' does that mean the bacteria was placed into Adam and Eve's guts? Before that, it'd be harder for them to digest. Isn't that a 'curse' before the 'curse'?

All those things were in existence before the Fall but only became toxic and hazardous in the changed environment after. It was changed , not made new.

How do you know? Won't the lack of toxic materials in cyanobacteria, plants and animals rob them of their chemical defenses? That'd be a 'curse' on them.

Biting a fruit doesn't. God's punishment for disobedience does.

I was being funny about a little bite causing all of this. Yeah, in the story, it was the god who did the 'curse.' In effect, he punished the entire biosphere for the actions of two members, which is a mark of a mean teacher. I also consider this a way for Christians to make people feel guilty about everything in the environoment considered 'bad' by Christians just for being a human that the Christians claim to be descended from Adam and Eve. I consider it much simpler to consider the entire story a myth created by anthropocentric Bronze age people who knew much less about the workings of the world than we do now. Believing in those myths as the absolute truth only damages humanity by encouraging extreme anthropocentrism and discouraging investigation into the real reasons why things happen.

God put the initial curse on the planet but it didn't impact the entire creation immediately. That started the chain of events that rippled outward in time and space.

If it is claimed that there was such a chain of events, then what was it and where is the evidence for it?

 

[Maria]

Didn't you see what I said about what omniscience on the part of the god would mean? I said that if the god knows everything, then when he was planting the tree in the garden, he knew that Adam and Eve would eat the fruit. Then why did he do it anyway? Do not use the free will weaseling because knowing everything would entail knowing what people use their free will to do.

Well, that's God's STORY to show how much His Love for us. He created the book to tell about Him by creatin' this earth, universe, time and space... everythin'. Yes, He is omniscience. He is also omnipotence and omnipresence.
God's wisdom is His perfect awareness of what is happenin' in all of His creation in any given moment. This includes His knowledge of the final outcome of His creation and of how He will work from beginnin' to endin' of human history. ( Job 11:4-12; 28:1-28; Psalms 139; Romans 11 ). It also includes His ability to know what is best for each and every one of His creatures.

Another possiblity is that the god was not omniscientist, allowing for free will. That would permit him to learn, which is what seems to happen when he found Adam and Eve after they ate the fruit. That means the god is not unchanging because learning is a kind of change.

God never makes an error, not even one. He is intimate. He is not an impersonal force like gravity, exertin' influence in some mechanical, automatic way. He has personal characteristics, just as we do. He forms relationships and has purpose and will. He is a jealous God, takin' Himself seriously and insistin' that others take Him seriously ( Ex. 34:14; Nah 1:2; 1 Cor. 10:22 ).

Yet another possiblity is that it's all a myth.

Genesis 3 looks like it provided an answer to ancient people to why snakes do not have legs. Remember that this is supposed to be the beginning of the world with only two people, so it could be supposed that the snake Eve talked with was one of the few snakes in existence if there were any others. So having only a few snakes would be fitting with the short time after creation.

There is nothing in Genesis 3 to show that the snake is anything other than one of the first snakes, rather than Satan himself. If the ancient people considered that snake to be Satan like modern Christians do, then that would mean Creationists would have to admit that their beliefs imply that all snakes are descendants of Satan and should be considered evil. Yet snakes are important parts of the food web because they keep the rodent population under control, rather than eating dust as the god 'cursed' them to do.

People are often scared of snakes, so it's not surprising that this got incorporated into a story that portrays it as evil.

It seems like that people think that the snake is Satan because of how Paul used the example of the snake and Eve in 2 Corinthians 11 to warn people about being corrupted. There's nothing that explicitly says the snake was Satan. So how do you differentiate between the snake being Satan himself, a puppet of Satan, a worker for Satan, an independent evil creature that is just used as an analogy by Paul, or an early mythical snake whose misdeeds are said to explain snakes' lack of limbs and the fear people have for them?

There's also the issue of different kinds of snakes. I don't know how many species live in the Middle East, but I'd not be surprised if the ancient people thought that they were all descendants of the snake in the garden, because that would explain, in their minds, why they don't have limbs.

In the story, it was god who decided to 'curse' the earth, rather than doing something else, like punishing Adam and Eve in a way that didn't affect the whole earth. Why would the god do that if he didn't hate his own creation?

Revelation 12:9

" And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the
Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out
into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. " He didn't hate His own creation, because He knows what is the outcome at the end. At the end, it always bring good. He is the Artist and He knows what He's doin'. We are His clay and He is the Potter.

And please try to explain how all of those disease causing things could have resulted from just eating a fruit, including diseases that don't affect humans. And don't forget to explain the issues of organisms like Escherichia coli and cyanobacteria that are both good and bad. Didn't the animals, Adam and Eve have E. coli to help them digest food? If that got out of their guts, they'd have gotten sick, regardless of if the god had 'cursed' the earth yet or not. There are also other bacteria in the guts of some animals like horses and rabbits and termites that are required for their proper functioning. Getting those bacteria out of the guts would be a bad idea. So either those bacteria were around before the 'curse' and it was possible to get sick from them, or the animals and people found it hard or impossible to digest food. Or the whole story could be a myth made up by Bronze age people who knew less about the world than we do.

Well, God gave them herbs and plant products to take care of their " sick " bodies. Herbs and plant products were among the most popular of ancient medicines, applied to the body as a poultice or taken by mouth. Frankincense and myrrh -- gum resins obtained from trees -- were commonly used to treat a variety of diseases, although their main use was in perfumes and incense. Some plant remedies may have been harmful, even poisonous ( 2 Kings 4:39-41 ). A few may actually have been of some benefit.

Despite obvious medical limitations, many of the patients recovered; and many of the remedies used were " successful. "

Diseases came from the Fall........... by how ? By disobeyin' God where Adam and Eve were taken place. Disobedience was created by Satan since Satan, the former Lucifer who disobeyed God before he was kicked out of heaven. That was his FIRST fall before he created another fall for Adam and Eve before they both were kicked out of the Garden by God.

 

[RedFox]

Well, God gave them herbs and plant products to take care of their " sick " bodies. Herbs and plant products were among the most popular of ancient medicines, applied to the body as a poultice or taken by mouth. Frankincense and myrrh -- gum resins obtained from trees -- were commonly used to treat a variety of diseases, although their main use was in perfumes and incense. Some plant remedies may have been harmful, even poisonous ( 2 Kings 4:39-41 ). A few may actually have been of some benefit.

Despite obvious medical limitations, many of the patients recovered; and many of the remedies used were " successful. "

Diseases came from the Fall........... by how ? By disobeyin' God where Adam and Eve were taken place. Disobedience was created by Satan since Satan, the former Lucifer who disobeyed God before he was kicked out of heaven. That was his FIRST fall before he created another fall for Adam and Eve before they both were kicked out of the Garden by God.

You said the same thing before about the Fall making god 'curse' the earth. Since herbs and things like that can treat diseases, were they around before the 'curse'? If disobedience was created by Satan, shouldn't Adam and Eve be considered victims and taught a lesson about the nature of Satan, so they won't repeat the same mistakes? That'd what a teacher would do, not 'curse' the entire Earth. This makes me see the god as more of a controlling monster than a good teacher.

And where is your evidence for there being two falls and for them even happening? If it's from the bible, how do you know if it's good evidence?

 

[RedFox]

I thought of another example. Why does carbon monoxide, cyanide, sulfur monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfides bind to hemoglobin as well or better than oxygen? If that was not the case before the 'curse' then god changed things to make those things toxic. That would mean messing with the properties of the atoms and ions involved, especially the properties of electrons, which would mean messing with particle physics, including the electron charge. Where are the weird things resulting from that?

 

[jazzy]

I do not think God change things around, it is us who make things bad happen to us alike we polluted water and sky which cause many people sick.
Original sin was created when Adam and Eve made this choice and they grew old and dies. If they never bit that forbbiden apple, they may never grew old and dies.

 

[RedFox]

I do not think God change things around, it is us who make things bad happen to us alike we polluted water and sky which cause many people sick.
Original sin was created when Adam and Eve made this choice and they grew old and dies. If they never bit that forbbiden apple, they may never grew old and dies.

Did people cause things like hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanos and tornados? Those things are the results of how the Earth functioned and as I explained in another post in another thread, without the plate tectonics and processes inside Earth that are behind earthquakes and volcanos, we won't have the proper balance of carbon and land because without tectonic processes allowing volcanos to resupply carbon dioxide to the air, carbon would get locked up into calcium carbonate and erosion would flatten land to below sea level without plate tectonic building mountains.

Hurricanes form over warm parts of the ocean because of how the air responds to the higher temperature. Tornados form because of air masses of different temperatures meeting and they form easily where such air masses can meet without being blocked by mountains, like the plains states with polar air meeting air from the gulf. The water and air get warmed to different temperatures because the material in tropcial areas get more direct sunlight than polar regions. That happens because the earth is round.

Since you said that the god did not change things around, the Earth would be running in the same way with volcanos, earthquakes, tornados and hurricanes. These happen for natural reasons, not just because of people doing bad things.