Arguing the negative naybob of negativity style, instead of dealing with the subject directly, does not make your arguments very convincing. You said that God did not plan for Adam to sin. Then what was he doing planting the tree, and creating the conditions for the sin to occur? Hoping?
Oh please! Your conclusion has no support and now you say it being negative to point that out. You call it “logical”, but why is it logical, how is it logical if our perceptions are deceptive?
Or am I to accept at face value every statement you make?
“..... You said that God did not plan for Adam to sin. Then what was he doing planting the tree, and creating the conditions for the sin to occur? Hoping?”
Yes, I did, based upon what God said to Adam.
“Then what was he doing planting the tree, and creating the conditions for the sin to occur? Hoping?”
What is being done when I put up a “no trespassing” sign and cite the laws against doing so? Creating conditions for law breaking? Hoping? Or exercising my right to do as I wish with I own? To admit or exclude whom I wish from picking fruit from a tree I planted and own? From a tree I made the exception to a rule and posed no hardship to anyone to avoid?