Why Did God Plan for the Fall of Man?

[Josheb]

No one to my knowledge believes God doesn't intervene. My point is God is always intervening.

"Always" or often? How do you know that? How do you get around the problems of God making Himself dependent on His own creation because He's always intervening and never free not to intervene? How is it both cannot be true: God frequently intervenes where He wants (but is not required to do so dependently) AND He lets His design work as intended so that His sovereignty is asserted, visible, and undertood in BOTH ways, not an extreme version of just one or the other?

I think I may have misinterpreted you or your statement may have been ambiguous. If you don't wish to trade posts, that's fine.

I'd like my posts to be read as a collective whole and not single sentences read in neglect of all I posted. I do not mind be asked questions I haven't answered, and I do not mind being asked relevant questions from YOUR perspective, but it's rude and disrespectful to imply or insinuate something into someone else's posts - especially when the question was already answered elsewhere. If something is ambiguous 1) look elsewhere in the poster's posts and or 2) word the inquiry so the question doesn't insinuate.

The latter part was avoided. Good. Appreciated. I don't read any specific adverse insinuations, but the former part is a problem because I did speak to the prospect of my post being read as deistic or theistic. There is not excuse for saying,

"This would be deism (religious belief holding that God created the universe and established rationally comprehensible moral and natural laws but does not intervene in human affairs through miracles or supernatural revelation)."​

My interpretation of your post indicated DEISM.

That is your interpretation. That is not on me.

Attempts to make this out to be some ambiguity on my part makes the problem worse, not better...

Your analogy was man designing a car and it eventually goes wrong.

That was not my analogy, and responsibility for your interpretation of selected statements in neglect of the whole should be taken before fault is assumed.

That's deism IMO.

That opinion is incorrect.

Man designs a car and it runs on its own after that.

LOL.

It does not.

I propose God makes a car and is constantly causing every molecule of the car to work according to God's desire at any time ...

And God is thereby made dependent on His car. It is a very real theological problem that is easily addressed, but meticulous necessity is not the answer.

so if God decides the car can work without an engine (a miracle so to speak), it does so.

Whether God decides the car to work with an engine or without an engine He still has a design and He still has a plan. That comment does NOTHING to address the topic of God's plan. Furthermore, whether the car has an engine or not, if God is necessarily meticulously intervening a variety of logical and theological problems ensue, beginning with but not limited to 1) His becoming dependent upon His own creation and 2) His plan failing if He isn't intervening.

I can make a plan and make it succeed if I meticulously intervene in every detail from beginning to end!

There's nothing particularly divine about that premise. It's rather creaturely. A God who can decide on a plan and create a design that covers all possible circumstances without His constantly having to amend His plan and design is a vastly bigger, more omni-attributed God than one who dictatorially micromanages. The latter god is not a God.

Ad hominem .... *yawn*

It's not an ad hominem....

Hmmm, I see you're not as upset with me as I continue to read.

...but that is. I am not upset and I do not have to be upset to call cr@p "cr@p," and ask for change. Attributing ANYTHING to another is cr@p. So, please, for the second time, stop the cr@p. Stop reading into my posts things I did not state. Start considering all the was posted before thinking, interpreting, opining ambiguity, and doctrines contrary to what is stated.

Re: I said: I would contend that things do not works "by design" in regards to doing what God ordained.

I wish you would allow me the same liberty to be corrected if I misunderstand instead of assuming I am purposely send CR?P. *giggle/sigh*

And I wish to keep the posts about the posts and not the posters.

 

[Josheb]

Agreed ... note the ''maintaining of the design as opposed to "design only" which I interpret as deism and that was my interpretation of your previous post; that you were referring to "design only" IMO.

Never said "design only." Never said it, never implied it, never remotely insinuated it, BUT understood some might read it that way AND spoke decisively against it.

Apparently I interpreted incorrectly.

Yep.

Yes I agree. Things do not work by design. Things work by someone insuring thing work as designed. To work by design is deism; that the thing works on its own after God get it going. I would need a definition of "design" and "ordain" to comment. Both words are synonyms for "plan" in my mind.

Hey, I was not trying to give you a difficult time. Perhaps I misinterpreted what you said initially. From the statements you just made I think we may be in agreement; we just had a miscommunication.

I believe that every molecule in the universe would cease to exist if God somehow ceased to exist. I believe the properties of every molecule in the universe only continue to act as they do because God causes it to be so. I.E. all matter attracts other matter (Gravity) because God, nanosecond to nanosecond, is causing it continue. I deny deism in any form. If I mistakenly thought your statements were a support of deism and they were not ... so be it. I do my best. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe you accidently wrote something that implies support of deism. Whatever.

I do not care.

None of that has anything to do with what was actually posted and everything to do with what was imagined. I never said, "design only," and posted explicitly against the premise.

Anyways, I do like your posts...

Aside: I'm on a ship on the ocean and my internet "sucks".

I do not care. Keep the posts about the posts and not the posters and we won't have any problems. Read all the posts as a whole and don't interpret selected statements apart from that whole and we won't have any problems.





Meticulous intervention is not a better position than design-only-deism - and neither have anything to do with the position asserted in the o, or the alternative I posted.

 

[Josheb]

So we're not living in a universe God decreed?

Is that a rhetorical question or a question indicating you actually think I think we live in a not-decreed universe (given the content of my posts)?

 

[makesends]

Relevance to this op?

(After providing relevance) Define "immanence" as you mean it to be used in this conversation.

I stand rebuked. I wandered off on a tangent, as I often do.

 

[sawdust]

Is that a rhetorical question or a question indicating you actually think I think we live in a not-decreed universe (given the content of my posts)?

It was a question to bring you back to the context of what I said not your interpretation of what I said. I was not comparing how this universe looked at different times. I was comparing this universe to all the potential universes God could have manifested. This is the one which He brought forth. Adam had no capacity to bring forth anything, he simply revealed what God had already declared.

 

[GeneZ]

Would you mind clarifying that because the "for" creates some ambiguity. Did God plan the fall?

How God planned is not the point we need to understand at first. The fact that He, knowing all things, had planned for the fall is like how parents may plan for a child's birthday. What they plan specifically is not the issue at hand. They planned is the issue.

The fact that God planned for the fall of man we have specific evidence for.

All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written ​

in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev 13:8​

He was slain because God knew man would fall. God planned for it.

 

[sawdust]

How God planned is not the point we need to understand at first. The fact that He, knowing all things, had planned for the fall is like how parents may plan for a child's birthday. What they plan specifically is not the issue at hand. They planned is the issue.

The fact that God planned for the fall of man we have specific evidence for.

All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written ​

in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev 13:8​

He was slain because God knew man would fall. God planned for it.

I think the logical question most people ask out from your post is:

"Then why would God create a system He knew would fail and cause sorrow and pain? Even if He had a solution in hand, it was a solution that caused sorrow and pain."

(playing devil's advocate here)

 

[GeneZ]

I think the logical question most people ask out from your post is:

"Then why would God create a system He knew would fail and cause sorrow and pain? Even if He had a solution in hand, it was a solution that caused sorrow and pain."

(playing devil's advocate here)

The system was placed invented and placed in force because God knew man would fall.

God in order to create *real lives* needed to not interfere with their volition in how He created them.
He had to be neutral in regards to how they would choose in regards to how they approved, or disapproved of their creator.

The question is?

How was it possible for omniscient God to create all humans and angels with only the best in mind for them? Yet, have intact the freedom of their wills to go against God?

It was imperative that God create humans and angels with volition if they were to truly be autonomous lives being able to choose to be with Him, or reject. Otherwise God would have remained alone with very sophisticated preprogrammed robots.

There is a key as to how God was able to achieve that goal. Its to be found in Jesus when he came to the earth.

grace and peace ...................

 

[Josheb]

It was a question to bring you back to the context of what I said not your interpretation of what I said. I was not comparing how this universe looked at different times. I was comparing this universe to all the potential universes God could have manifested. This is the one which He brought forth. Adam had no capacity to bring forth anything, he simply revealed what God had already declared.

That does not answer my questions. Was the question asked rhetorically, or was it asked because you think I think we live in a not-decreed universe?

I was not comparing how this universe looked at different times. I was comparing this universe to all the potential universes God could have manifested. This is the one which He brought forth. Adam had no capacity to bring forth anything, he simply revealed what God had already declared.

Yep. I understand all of that and nothing I posted should have been construed to say otherwise.


Was the question asked rhetorically, or was it asked because you think I think we live in a not-decreed universe?

Answer that question.

 

[Josheb]

How God planned is not the point we need to understand at first.

Never said otherwise.

The fact that He, knowing all things, had planned for the fall is like how parents may plan for a child's birthday.

I disagree and have been waiting for many posts for how that premise is necessary so to the exclusion of any other possibility.

What they plan specifically is not the issue at hand.

Hmmm... think that through. God planned for the fall but what God planned is not the issue at hand. If you think you can prove God planned for the fall without including any information pertaining to what was planned, then I am all eyes and ears BUT the facts in evidence show a great deal of time and content was spent posting about what was planned.

This is enormously inconsistent.

They planned is the issue.

I do not read anyone here say God did not plan.

The fact that God planned for the fall of man we have specific evidence for.

All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev 13:8

He was slain because God knew man would fall. God planned for it.

Which is an entirely post hoc argument. As such it is logically fallacious. It's not evidence of anything except a specific bias in interpretation and a lapse in logic. I brought this up many posts ago. Repeating the problem does not solve the problem. God know what would happen does not mean God had to have a specific plan for it. There is a better, more whole-scripture alternative that does not empty post hoc arguments......

.....but I am happy to read the case for your position as long as 1) you eventually get to the point and 2) avail the position of honest scrutiny.

 

[sawdust]

That does not answer my questions. Was the question asked rhetorically, or was it asked because you think I think we live in a not-decreed universe?

Yep. I understand all of that and nothing I posted should have been construed to say otherwise.


Was the question asked rhetorically, or was it asked because you think I think we live in a not-decreed universe?

Answer that question.

I told you why the question was asked.

If you understood what I said then you wouldn't have talked about Adam manifesting this universe as no man has the power to bring forth a universe and declare it to be the reality.

 

[sawdust]

The system was placed invented and placed in force because God knew man would fall.

God in order to create *real lives* needed to not interfere with their volition in how He created them.
He had to be neutral in regards to how they would choose in regards to how they approved, or disapproved of their creator.

The question is?

How was it possible for omniscient God to create all humans and angels with only the best in mind for them? Yet, have intact the freedom of their wills to go against God?

It was imperative that God create humans and angels with volition if they were to truly be autonomous lives being able to choose to be with Him, or reject. Otherwise God would have remained alone with very sophisticated preprogrammed robots.

There is a key as to how God was able to achieve that goal. Its to be found in Jesus when he came to the earth.

grace and peace ...................

So you're saying He went ahead and created anyway for the sake of real freedom, not simply an illusion of freedom?

 

[GeneZ]

So you're saying He went ahead and created anyway for the sake of real freedom, not simply an illusion of freedom?

I was hinting about how Jesus' example of how, as God, he was able to make Himself to become as a man.
In his altered state as a man Jesus needed to pray to the Father for all his needs, and was not omniscient.

Since Jesus had that capacity? Able to enter himself into such a state? And, remain impeccable in his humanity?
Its in that very state of being he placed himself when all things were created *through* him. In that way granting all
created lives the freedom not to interfere with their own ability to choose while creating them in his mind.

He was able to create in his mind ever angel and every man while being in a state of suspended omniscience, which allowed him to create each one of us in perfect love and perfect intention.

After he finished creating in his mind did he return to his state of being God. That is when He could see from his Deity the outcome of all he had created.

It was just like he was on earth as a man. Came here and shed himself of his powers to be God. And, as a man fulfilled the atonement as a man. And, when his work was finished, he returned to Heaven to once again function as God. Its a unique niche that He has in the Trinity.

grace and peace ..............

 

[Josheb]

I told you why the question was asked.

I did not ask why.

If you understood what I said then you wouldn't have talked about Adam manifesting this universe...

Neither did I say Adam manifested the universe.

 

[sawdust]

I did not ask why.

You wanted to know was it for one reason or another reason. I gave you the courtesy of the specific reason it was asked so you should have been able to deduce for yourself that the answer to your question was no and no as neither was a valid reason for my asking the question.

Neither did I say Adam manifested the universe.

You pointed to Romans 5:12 which is a direct reference to Adam. You also claimed to know that when I referred to "God manifesting this universe" that I was speaking of Him bringing it forth from all the potential universes (multiverse) yet you declared God did not manifest it but blamed humans for bringing it out where it could be seen. (see below)

It is not the universe God manifested. The universe God manifested was stated by God to be very good (Gen. 1:31) and there was no sin in it. Humans manifested the current conditions, not God. This is plainly stated in Romans 5:12.

Within the context of what I was saying, your statement above is incorrect. God did manifest this universe and only God brought it forth and within that universe was the potential for death. Adam, did not create this condition any more than our believing creates life.

I'd prefer my posts to be read as a collective whole and not broken up into pieces of my sentences in neglect of it's context. Thankyou.

 

[Marilyn C]

Before our world was created on the face of this earth.
Before anyone was born of Adam and the Woman?
Even before Adam and the woman existed?

God already planned for the Fall of Man.
Of course God is omniscient and knew man would fall.
The question I have God gave the green light to have man fall?

All those who make their home on the earth will worship the beast—those whose names have not been written ​

from the beginning of the world in the Book of Life, which belongs to the Lamb that was slain." Revelation 13:8​

There is a distinction made in Revelation 13:8 between the planet/earth. And, cosmos = world of mankind.

From the beginning of man's creation the Lamb was slain in preparation for the fall of man.

Now the question is?

Did God want the fall to take place?
And, did it serve God's purpose to have it happen?

In order to understand why the fall of Adam took place for God's purpose, we must first come to another realization.
That angels preceded the creation of man.

And, most importantly.

That before Adam and the woman were in the Garden?
Satan was already fallen. And, with his angels with him who had made a choice to rebel against the authority of God over them.

Young earth creationists will not be able to follow what I have to say unless they are willing to drop their bias.

The angels were originally given dominion over what we now refer to as the prehistoric earth.
Just like Adam at his creation was given dominion over our current created world, so were the angels over the prehistoric earth.

God had authority over the angels running the prehistoric world. Just as God had authority over Adam and the woman.

Some must wonder...
"Why should God want mankind to fall?"

After all.. He knew man would fall before creating him.

Revelation 13:8, tells us God already had plans to redeem man before man was created.

This may ruffle some feathers of some.

For others it will cause a sense of relief.
Relief to realize that the reason for the mess we are stuck in at present ?
Will all makes sense.

grace and peace ................

God knew that only He had a good moral character, one that gives all of itself to another. Man did not have the moral character formed that would selflessly give of itself. Thus, the need for the fall, for man needed to see his vulnerable state and to willingly accept `dying` to self.

Lucifer was given the highest position over the angels as a kingpriest, but similarly could not `die to self.` He transformed himself into an angel of light, (2 Cor. 11: 14) and was thus able to deceive Eve. The `serpent` is a symbolic name for his tactic - to deceive, as all his other tactics, (devil, dragon, Satan, Rev. 12: 9)

Finally, we know that God gave His all, His Son who gave His all and now we, as the Body of Christ are able to partake of Christ`s divine nature, (2 Peter 1: 4) and thus `die to self.` The OT saints and believers after us will need to partake of the `Tree of life,` which is Christ in a different way than us. Still, we will all have eternal life in God`s great kingdom.

 

[GeneZ]

God knew that only He had a good moral character, one that gives all of itself to another. Man did not have the moral character formed that would selflessly give of itself. Thus, the need for the fall, for man needed to see his vulnerable state and to willingly accept `dying` to self.

Lucifer was given the highest position over the angels as a kingpriest, but similarly could not `die to self.` He transformed himself into an angel of light, (2 Cor. 11: 14) and was thus able to deceive Eve. The `serpent` is a symbolic name for his tactic - to deceive, as all his other tactics, (devil, dragon, Satan, Rev. 12: 9)

Finally, we know that God gave His all, His Son who gave His all and now we, as the Body of Christ are able to partake of Christ`s divine nature, (2 Peter 1: 4) and thus `die to self.` The OT saints and believers after us will need to partake of the `Tree of life,` which is Christ in a different way than us. Still, we will all have eternal life in God`s great kingdom.

Morality is a choice.
Morality is produced by choosing to do right...

God transcends morality.

For God never "chooses" to do right.
God is always being what is right.

God's nature has always been and will always be - absolute, immutable, Divine Virtue.

 

[Marilyn C]

Morality is a choice.
Morality is produced by choosing to do right...

God transcends morality.

For God never "chooses" to do right.
God is always being what is right.

God's nature has always been and will always be - absolute, immutable, Divine Virtue.

That is why I said that only God has a good moral character. Mankind however had to form their moral character by choosing. Adam`s moral character was vulnerable as moral character (outside of God) is formed over time, eg. faithfulness.

 

[Marilyn C]

Also, God is three persons, and they give of themselves to each other. When man was made, he was one, uno. Thus, the need to enable him to die to self and that as we know is only though Christ.

 

[Josheb]

You wanted to know was it for one reason or another reason.

No, I wanted to know if it was because of two specified reasons. The question asked has not been answered and I'm not giving you another opportunity.

You are trolling. I am not interested.