Adam's Failure: Who's Really to Blame — Adam or God?
Striving for a “Zero-Failure Mindset”: Learn for Success, Not from Failure (Part 3)
This is the third part in the ongoing Zero-Failure Mindset series:
Part 1: The Titanic and the tragic cost of Failure
Part 2: Understanding the Origin of the "Failure Epidemic"
Let’s dive in!
In Part 2, we ended with this pondering question —
Whose fault was Adam’s Failure — Adam’s or God’s?
Here in Part 3, I'll attempt to answer the question.
This is an important question to ask, given that God made the "product" called Man, why would this good "product" be susceptible to failure?
Especially when this isn't just a single failure but one that has proliferated throughout history, infecting all of mankind.
Product Liability as an Analogy of God's Creation
In product design and manufacturing, the responsibility for a product’s function and safety relies solely on the manufacturer.
The manufacturer ensures that all components required for functionality are well-fitted according to design.
To avoid product liability lawsuits, good manufacturers, who are worth their salt, go out of their way to ensure faultless designs.
However, a manufacturer will not be liable if their product has been tampered with and put into a dangerous condition that causes malfunction or failure. Most times, these failures result in grave injuries or massive losses.
For example, consider the Supreme Court of New York’s case of Silverstein v. Walsh Press Die Company.
This 1986 legal case involved Warren Silverstein, Walsh Press & Die Company, and Livingston Industries.
Silverstein, an employee of Livingston Industries, was injured while operating a 60-ton metal punch press. The press was manufactured by Walsh Press & Die Company in 1947.
However, the machine had been substantially altered by previous owners before it was acquired by Livingston Industries.
Vital parts such as its motor, pedal assembly, and safety features have been altered since it was initially manufactured.
Silverstein, who lost three of his fingers, argued that his injuries resulted from the press’s malfunction and Walsh's failure to equip the machine with safety devices or provide adequate warnings and instructions.
Walsh, however, contended that modifications done over the 34 years since they sold the machine had altered it so substantially.
They claimed the product that caused the injuries could no longer be considered their product, thereby relieving them of any liability.
The court sided with Walsh, concluding that the company wasn't liable for Silverstein's injuries and left Silverstein responsible for his own damages.
God is Creation’s Manufacturer and He has His Will —
The entirety of creation was an expression of God’s Will.
In Greek, the word Will translates to thelēma — suggesting a strong determination, a resolute decree, or in its passive form, an inclination, a desire or pleasure.
No one coerced God into creation; He brought it to bear by His inherently good, acceptable, and perfect Will, creating all things after the pleasure of His Will.
So we found that the twenty-four elders in the Book of Revelation in the worship of God said — “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power; for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure, they are and were created” — Rev 4:11.
One of the things that makes God God is His Will — and His ability to exercise His Will is an integral part of his nature.
Many Years ago, I heard Dr. Myles Munroe teach the concept of Source at creation.
He mentioned that during creation, God spoke to the source of what He wanted to create.
For plants, trees, and animals, He spoke to the earth;
To create fishes and birds, He spoke to the waters.
But to create Man, He spoke to Himself — let us make man in our own image and likeness.
So Man also has the ability to choose and act on his “Free Will” — just like God and Angels.
Yes, Angels too possess Free Will.
That is why Lucifer could rebel; that is why many Angels also fell along with Lucifer.
Eliphaz confirmed this in Job 4:16-19
Can a mortal be more righteous than God?
Can even a strong man be more pure than his Maker?
If God places no trust in his servants,
if he charges his angels with error,
how much more those who live in houses of clay,
whose foundations are in the dust,
who are crushed more readily than a moth
And in Job 15:14-16 (NIV)
What are mortals, that they could be pure,
or those born of woman, that they could be righteous?
If God places no trust in his holy ones,
if even the heavens are not pure in his eyes,
how much less mortals, who are vile and corrupt,
who drink up evil like water!
For this class of creation, Free will is important.
This is because — Love from a robot is not Love, and people don’t feel good knowing they have they have been manipulated to love someone.
God allowed man to exercise free will because He intended for Man to always freely choose Him — He doesn’t want Love from a programmed robot.
Unfortunately, Man willfully and deliberately rejected God.
But we must recognize that “Free Will” is an extension of the Creator's benevolence.
God, the author of Free Will, exercises divine responsibility with His Free Will; meanwhile, Adam was reckless with his.
Failure, in my opinion, is a consequence of the deliberate abuse of Free Will.
I showed failure's substantial cost with the sinking of the Titanic ship in Part 1 of this series.
Companies cannot be held liable unless there’s a defect in their product or service. However, in the natural, it is almost impossible to achieve zero defects and zero liability.
But not with God. Being, a responsible manufacturer, He provided all the safety precautions.
First, He boasted that this product called Man was “Very Good” — meaning he was the highest form of excellence, completely failure-proof.
Next, He put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden— unhidden, in the open, conspicuous, with no ambiguities such that it would not be confused with other trees.
Then He gave clear instructions, like a safety manual or directions of sorts, and presented the dire consequences of violations.
God did what every responsible manufacturer would do. God cannot be blamed as He had no liabilities for this damage.
So If the product fails, don’t ask the manufacturer, ask the primary user; ask the the patient-zero; ask Adam!
I strongly think it's high time we reevaluate our perception of it. Because, Failure, no matter how we dress it up, should be deemed undesirable.
But today, we see a trend of Romanticizing Failure.
The catastrophic consequences of failure are evident — failure of vehicle brakes, a plane's engine, a surgeon's critical mistake, or a ship's crew disregarding iceberg warnings.
Very disturbingly is that we have grown accustomed to failure, and our illicit romance with it has given birth to many "failure children" in various life aspects.
Yet, when we observe other aspects of Nature, we find a stark contrast.
Created by God, nature operates on immutable laws ensuring its sustainability.
This is visible in the four key elements of nature — sun, earth, wind, and water bodies.
The sun has never failed to provide heat and light; oceans and seas haven't failed to facilitate intercontinental voyages.
The wind blows ceaselessly across the earth, and the solid ground beneath our feet remains constant.
The only problematic element in creation is Man
As I argued in part 2, ever since the fall, we saw the manifestation of failure when Adam and Eve used fig leaves as makeshift clothing — they missed the mark for the first time.
Since then, failure has permeated every aspect of human life — from family to governance, economics, institutions, and culture.
Unfortunately, everything man-made, from systems, artefacts, devices and machines to processes, has become failure-prone.
Today, there's a prevailing belief that Failure is an integral part of the learning process.
This has been championed by many motivational speakers and several books have been written on it.
However, there's a clear distinction to be made: learning has no value if its cost is excessively high, often at the expense of human lives.
Consider an untrained or intoxicated pilot crashing a plane on a mountainside with the hope of learning from failure.
Or an ambitious scientist conducting gain-of-function research on risky viruses to understand how to curtail a pandemic outbreak; this was the forerunner to the COVID-19 pandemic and its devastating death toll.
Perhaps we've been too casual with our use of the term "Failure".
This unrestricted acceptance of failure costs lives — valuable human lives.
It is an unacceptable trade-off to gain the whole world at the expense of souls. It's time we reconsider our viewpoint on Failure.
Failure ought to remain an undesirable outcome, regardless of how we dress it up or how accustomed we've become to its consequences.
The concept of Failure is foreign to God's creation, which continues to operate seamlessly in line with His Will.
It underscores the urgent need for us to reassess, and possibly redefine, our perception of failure.
Listen to what I had to say in the following audio embed—
Yes, subscribing to the School of Failure is a costly approach to learning.
But is there an alternative?
It is true that Man failed, but that Failure did not abort the Will of God.
So if indeed the will of God is good, acceptable and perfect, and if that Will defines the safety conditions for Man to always succeed, what can Man do to adopt the Zero-Failure mindset?
This will be the subject of the next post.
Stay tuned.
— Dr Azu ✌️
Your Wisdom Partner
P.S
Please share your thoughts on this series so far and I’ll be glad to engage with you. I value your readership! 😁
You can also grab my latest e-book compilation at a give-away prices
This is a mindshift
Have a zero -failure MINDSET.