Why didn’t God throw in the towel at the very beginning?

Interviewer: Was the flood a real event and Noah a real person?
God: Definitely.
Interviewer: But a flood that covered the whole earth sounds preposterous. Where would all that water come from?
God: The conditions prevalent in the world and atmospheric heavens in those days were far different than what exists today. You can’t judge what was by what now is.
Interviewer: So the Genesis account of creation is completely factual?
God: The Genesis account is wholly factual, though it is admittedly very brief.
Interviewer: In retrospect, should You have made it longer?
God: That is an interesting thought. But no, it is enough. What more should I have said there?
Interviewer: Well, perhaps a little about the mechanisms You used. I mean, to say something like “the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters” seems to leave a fair bit of the picture out. What were You doing, what were You thinking?
God: I was doing one thing at a time. I had to create one thing at time in the right progression. As for what I was thinking, I was thinking about the beautiful place I was going to create.
Interviewer: You had foreknowledge about what was going to happen?
God: You mean the fall of Adam and Eve?
Interviewer: Yes, but not only that. I mean the wars and other things that were going to ravage the world in the centuries to come.
God: Yes, I did.
Interviewer: So why didn’t You throw in the towel at the very beginning? I mean, why bother, since it looks like things didn’t turn out as beautifully as You had planned?
God: This world can be very beautiful. And the reasons that much of it is not can usually be traced back to man. But one always has to realize that this world isn’t the final product. It is a testing ground and a giant demonstration. It is a testing ground for humankind and a demonstration to show humanity that when left to their own devices, they don’t do a terribly good job of things. Thus they will be grateful for My authority, presence, and guidance in the world to come.
Interviewer: I think we covered some of this ground before. I apologize for making You repeat Yourself.
God: Not a problem.
Interviewer: So, back to education. What would You like to see man educated in?
God: In those things that will help him live in peace and harmony with the rest of his kind.
Interviewer: Which would be…
God: The skills involved in communication, the skills involved in providing a sufficient livelihood for himself and his neighbors.
Interviewer: That’s it?
God: Basically, yes.
Interviewer: Basic is just about the right word for it.
God: There is a lot in those two categories.
Interviewer: I suppose there is, but I think You have just handed a lot of people in the field of education pink slips.
God: I don’t think that they need worry that much, because in this world they’ll keep their jobs. But in the world to come they may need to choose something along the lines I just talked about to be their field of educational expertise.
Interviewer: Surely in the next world there wouldn’t be a need for educators.
God: On the contrary, learning doesn’t cease once you cross over. In the world to come, there are limitless opportunities to learn. And those who learn will require teachers. So there is a role for educators.
Interviewer: Well, why would we bother? We’ll know everything we need to know once we get there, won’t we?
God: Goodness, no! There will be lots to learn in the world to come. This world is only a shadow of that one, so if you thought that there was a lot to learn here, then you are going to be surprised at how much there is to learn there. Man has an inquisitiveness that is part of human nature. That part of his nature will live on, and there are limitless opportunities to learn and experience new things.
Interviewer: I notice that whenever You talk about the next world You tend to wax lyrical about it.
God: It’s worth waxing lyrical about. I want to make it sound so tempting-which it is, and really I am hardly scratching the surface of all there is to tell-that everyone will want to go there.
Interviewer: It does sound inviting. Well, just a few more questions, if I may, sort of in the same vein. We discussed evolutionists trying to disprove intelligent creation, and by extension, a creator. Can science prove the reverse, that there is a creator, that You exist?
God: Scientists, if they honestly review the data, will always come back to the conclusion that there is an intelligent design behind the universe. Some who differ on this point may howl at this and say that I am accusing them of being charlatans, but sometimes it is a case of those hit that howl. I know that there are plenty of avenues that invite investigation and speculation, and I am not calling scientists dishonest if they sometimes make wrong postulations along the way. I am saying that once they review the data objectively, they will have to come to the conclusion that this all didn’t happen by accident. And so if it didn’t happen by accident, then it happened by design, so there has to be someone or ones who designed it. So although you can’t isolate Me in a test tube and say, “Aha, here He is,” one can with rational reasoning, even scientific reasoning, conclude that I exist.