Why Did God Plan for the Fall of Man?

[Josheb]

Which presupposes if sin never occurred Christ still would have died on the Cross. I am trying to ascertain if this is in fact what you believe. I am not trying to argue the OP with you. I am trying to clarify your position on what you have declared.

No, you are not to ascertain or clarify anything because I have already answered and addressed every matter you have broached. I have made myself clear. Those comments are completely disingenuous and there is no excuse for them.

Herein is the problem I see based on your explanation. You see humans as being made corruptible and mortal and God's plan of Christ's sacrifice and resurrection as the solution to creating humans incorruptible and immortal. While at the same time you say angels, also being created corruptible and mortal, but God has no plan whatsoever for them even though they end up equally incorruptible and immortal.

Incorrect. While it is true God's plan was to raise some incorruptible and immortal the rest of that is incorrect, not in any way consistent with what I have posted, written id direct contradiction to what I have posted and there is, therefore, no excuse for such a gross misrepresentation. You are NOT trying.

I get around it by seeing God's plan isn't for Himself but for His creation. He is the pre-eminent Servant King. He doesn't make plans for Himself (God has no need for anything) but He plans for His creation and for His plan to succeed, it must fit His creation.

Left something out: He is the servant king dependent on sin's existence.

It is not a "get around." It is a problem to be solved. It is the presuppositional blind spot in the op's case.

God is "Success" personified so doesn't need any plan to make Himself more successful.

Got scripture for that?

Success implies an outcome to an action. An outcome implies a purpose and a goal. Your premise is a planless, purposeless, goalless success dependent on sin from a God who from the beginning to the end of His revelation about Himself emphasized goals, stewardship, and fruitfulness. You've got a planless god of success. That is not a God, and it most certainly not the God of the Bible. If His commands are a reflection of His being, His ontology, His character, then commands like, "Let there be light..." are not planless. Is there any creating apart from creativeness and creative ability? No creative purpose? Creative purpose without a plan?


Psalm 33:11
The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of His heart from generation to generation.

Isaiah 14:24-27
The LORD of hosts has sworn saying, "Surely, just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I have planned so it will stand........... This is the plan devised against the whole earth; and this is the hand that is stretched out against all the nations. For the LORD of hosts has planned, and who can frustrate it? And as for His stretched-out hand, who can turn it back?"

Isaiah 25:1
O LORD, You are my God; I will exalt You, I will give thanks to Your name; for You have worked wonders, plans formed long ago, with perfect faithfulness.

Jeremiah 29:11
For I know the plans that I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.

Whether God needs a plan or not He has them. So add, "I can and have listed scriptures showing God makes plans," to the list in the previous post and in your column add another baseless statement void of scripture.

The logically necessary conclusion of your comment is the God who needs no plan said, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it," not needing nor having a plan. The God who said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age," said that not needing and not having a plan. Even more ironic, God did not need a plan to torturously murder His own Son.

Have you got scripture stating God "doesn't need any plan to make Himself successful," or not? Are you just making it up as you go solely for the purpose of arguing?

As far as the matter "need" goes, that is a red herring, and it has nothing to do with anything I have posted. It is, however, a matter you should take up with the op because I have never once said, implied, or even remotely insinuated God has ANY need, but this op has argued there is a need for God to have a plan for the fall of man. If you truly believe God does not need any plan to be successful, then you should never have sided with or defended this op. Mine is the case saying God did not need to plan for the fall to be successful and if that has escaped your understanding then..... go back and re-read what has been posted!



Say it: Whether God needs them or not He has in fact made plans.

 

[Arial]

As far as I have read in the entire thread, I'm the only one addressing the problem of God's dependency on sin if He his only plan for creation is addressing the fall of humanity. As far as I can see, there's not only a huge silence in response to this, but there's also a blind spot that hasn't recognized the problem. There is, likewise, a significant lack of scripture in your dissent and a recurring refusal to acknowledge my ability to meet your challenges with scripture.

Or perhaps you have just not been able to hear it. An OP that states that God planned for the fall and then planned for it is one thing. The issue can be addressed from that premise, but to stretch it out into a conversation that presumes that what everyone is saying is that God is dependant upon sin is beyond the pale. I certainly have not said that and have not ever said anything that would make God's creation solely dependant upon sin. And I have not read every post that has been posted.

You have stated the hypothetical what if God's purpose of creation was to create incorruptible, immortal man? This is not only absurd but it makes creation entirely dependant upon sin.

What if the original goal - always existent from the beginning whether anyone ever disobeyed or not - was to make creature who were incorruptible and immortal?

You have been asked to address this since if God wanted a creature who was incorruptible and immortal He could have created them that way. But you have not. What was given as a response and explanation of what you mean simply went off in a clever and subtle way into a discussion of other things. Such as man did not have to sin----but if he had not he still had Christ and He would not have needed to come as a sacrifice for sin. And we would have had access to the tree of life. But Josh, we would still be corruptible and mortal, just not corrupted leading to our mortality. So Christ as the tree of life would be waiting for the first sin to be committed, and that person to be refused access to the tree of life, and their progeny. And each in turn in the Garden as they multiplied corruptible but not yet corrupt, and waiting for any at any time to eat of that bad tree and be cast out. There would be no time in which Christ could make any sort of definite atonement, one that deals with all sin past present and future for those in Christ through faith.

So Christ's coming as one of us in the incarnation was because of sin and to deal with sin. It was not the purpose of His eternal existence. That has no "purpose" it just is what it is. He is who He is. And it in no way, shape, or form, means God planned for the fall of man, or that creation is dependant upon sin. I don't know where you got that idea from in the first place.

 

[Arial]

Got scripture for that?

"I AM THAT I AM"

 

[GeneZ]

• I can list and have listed scriptures stating Adam was created good, unashamed, and sinless.
• I can list and have listed scriptures providing a timeline for the fall of both angels and humans.
• I can list and have listed scriptures citing the many reasons or purposes for Jesus' life, death, resurrection, and ascension.
• I can list and have listed scriptures indicating sin is not the only reason for Jesus' incarnation.
• I can list and have listed scriptures stating humans are created in God's image (twice: once in creation and again in Christ).
• I can list and have listed scriptures stating some humans are raised incorruptible and immortal.
• I can list and have listed scriptures stating the end of the angels who sinned is death, not incorruptible life eternal.
• I have argued for God's omni-attributes, sovereignty, and immutability using these where others have argued positions logically dictating a God who has to make contingency plans and is not immutable.

Saying those things does not give what you claim you did.
GIVE THEM!
If you have to repeat? Do so!

Otherwise? What you just said in that list of lists? Means nothing.
You just gave me nothing to think with. Scripture is needed.

 

[Josheb]

Or perhaps you have just not been able to hear it.

You've got to stop making snotty personal comments or you and I will be discussing this with the mods. Do not expect me to be baited into further non-conversation with you by these derogatory personal comments.

 

[Josheb]

You have been asked to address this since if God wanted a creature who was incorruptible and immortal He could have created them that way. But you have not.

LOL! He did create them that way and I have addressed that matter, and done so with scripture. Go back and re-read the posts.

 

[Arial]

LOL! He did create them that way and I have addressed that matter, and done so with scripture. Go back and re-read the posts.

He must not have as they became corrupted and mortal. He even put the element that would bring about the corruption in the Garden with them.

 

[CrowCross]

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.

Let me comment on the above....Satan fell after the creation of Adam and Eve as the bible tells us Lucifer walked in the garden of Eden in an un-fallen state......Eze 28:13 You were in Eden, the garden of God. The next verse tells us Lucifer was..."You were anointed as a guardian cherub, "

The next question as a YEC I have is...why should I be willing to drop my "bias"?
Where does the bible speak of a pre-Adamic time?

 

[Arial]

You've got to stop making snotty personal comments or you and I will be discussing this with the mods. Do not expect me to be baited into further non-conversation with you by these derogatory personal comments.

How is that a snotty or personal comment? You are the one who said no one addressed in the entire thread the "fallacy" (my designation)of sin being necessary in creation. And it had been addressed so obviously, since you responded to those posts, you did not hear what was being said. Saying here that I am baiting you is also a fallacy as after that remark I gave an entire post on the very subject of that sin/creation issue you said didn't exist, with the logical conclusion of the quoted post you made earlier. And which you only addressed with the above comment.

 

[Josheb]

He must not have as they became corrupted and mortal. He even put the element that would bring about the corruption in the Garden with them.

How could they become corrupted if they were not corruptible? An immortal creature cannot become mortal. The word "immortal" literally means "not subject to death, not able to die." The moment God said, "Do not eat... or you will die," the clear implication is that Adam (and Eve were mortal. If they were originally made immortal then it would not have mattered what they ate or who they disobeyed because they were immortal, not subject to death, and not able to die! The same applies to corruptiblitiy. And incorruptible creature is not able to be corrupted.

The moment you say, "as they became corrupted," their corruptibility is conceded.

Point of clarification: they did not "become" mortal. They were made that way. They were not made corrupted. They became that way. They were made corruptible, not corrupted.

1 Corinthians 15:42, 53-54
So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body..... For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."


Sown perishable and mortal. Raised imperishable and immortal.

 

[Josheb]

How is that a snotty or personal comment? You are the one who said no one addressed in the entire thread the "fallacy" (my designation)of sin being necessary in creation. And it had been addressed so obviously, since you responded to those posts, you did not hear what was being said. Saying here that I am baiting you is also a fallacy as after that remark I gave an entire post on the very subject of that sin/creation issue you said didn't exist, with the logical conclusion of the quoted post you made earlier. And which you only addressed with the above comment.

Got anything op-relevant to post?

 

[Arial]

Got anything op-relevant to post?

I am waiting to see if you respond to the op-relevant post I did make. And the one I made that was not op-relevant because it was made to our non op-relevant post. And this one is responding to your non op-relevant post. See how that goes? So why don't you stop asking non op-relevant questions that require an answer?

 

[Josheb]

I am waiting to see if you respond to the op-relevant post I did make.

The posts prove otherwise. That answer was posted before the question was asked.

 

[Arial]

The posts prove otherwise. That answer was posted before the question was asked.

Where?

 

[Josheb]

Where?

Start on Page 1 at Post #2 and follow the posts from there.

 

[Arial]

Start on Page 1 at Post #2 and follow the posts from there.

Good grief Josh! Really? Why don't you just tell me? That way it will be all in one spot.

 

[ChristB4us]

How could they become corrupted if they were not corruptible? An immortal creature cannot become mortal. The word "immortal" literally means "not subject to death, not able to die." The moment God said, "Do not eat... or you will die," the clear implication is that Adam (and Eve were mortal. If they were originally made immortal then it would not have mattered what they ate or who they disobeyed because they were immortal, not subject to death, and not able to die! The same applies to corruptiblitiy. And incorruptible creature is not able to be corrupted.

The moment you say, "as they became corrupted," their corruptibility is conceded.

Point of clarification: they did not "become" mortal. They were made that way. They were not made corrupted. They became that way. They were made corruptible, not corrupted.

1 Corinthians 15:42, 53-54
So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body..... For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."

Sown perishable and mortal. Raised imperishable and immortal.

Death came by sin and so they were immortal in that sense as a terrestrial body in the beginning but before they had a chance to multiply, they had fallen.

1 Corinthians 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Your reference is true but applied wrong when 1 Corinthians 15:21 testifies that they were not mortal in the sense that they can die before the fall.

So mankind became mortal after the fall.

Thanks to Jesus Christ, those worthy of the first-fruits of the resurrection will be made higher than the angels thus they can never die nor marry and live in the City of God forever at the pre great tribulation rapture event being the vessels unto honor, vessels of gold & silver.

Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Those resurrected after the great tribulation will have a glorified terrestrial body where the power of the second death will not be over them, hence hinting that the power of the first death still does for why they will be marrying and the generations following them, have to go to Jerusalem to eat from the tree of life for the healing of the nations, being the vessels unto dishonor in His House, the vessels of wood & earth.

 

[GeneZ]

Let me comment on the above....Satan fell after the creation of Adam and Eve as the bible tells us Lucifer walked in the garden of Eden in an un-fallen state......Eze 28:13 You were in Eden, the garden of God. The next verse tells us Lucifer was..."You were anointed as a guardian cherub, "

The next question as a YEC I have is...why should I be willing to drop my "bias"?
Where does the bible speak of a pre-Adamic time?

There were parallel gardens. Its a way in which God can work.

For where do we find stones of fire in Genesis 1-2?
Ezekiel 28:14, does not describe the same Garden Adam and the woman walked in.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.​

The two gardens were just as the Tabernacle of the Exodus was a copy of the one in Heaven!

If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already priests who offer ​

the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow ​

of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the ​

tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you ​

on the mountain.” Hebrews 8:4-5​

​

​

Making sense without asking for a cent...

Grace and peace .......

 

[GeneZ]

Let me comment on the above....Satan fell after the creation of Adam and Eve as the bible tells us Lucifer walked in the garden of Eden in an un-fallen state......Eze 28:13 You were in Eden, the garden of God. The next verse tells us Lucifer was..."You were anointed as a guardian cherub, "

The next question as a YEC I have is...why should I be willing to drop my "bias"?
Where does the bible speak of a pre-Adamic time?

Job 38:4-7 reveals that the angels were present and watching the creation of the earth.
It was a pre-Adamic time the angels lived in!

“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone—
while the morning stars sang together
and all the sons of God (angels) shouted for joy?​

Then "morning stars" were the light bearing type angels of from which we find Lucifer!

In Christ .............

 

[Josheb]

Death came by sin and so they were immortal in that sense as a terrestrial body in the beginning but before they had a chance to multiply, they had fallen.

1 Corinthians 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Your reference is true but applied wrong when 1 Corinthians 15:21 testifies that they were not mortal in the sense that they can die before the fall.

Let's review this.

First, the fact that the prohibition not to eat would be meaningless if they were not mortal. God did not say, "You are currently immortal but you will become mortal if you disobey Me." That is an assumption on the naysayer's part, not mine. Second, the fact immortal creatures do not need a tree of life to be immortal has also already been covered. The last thing God said before kicking Adam and Eve out of the garden was,

Genesis 3:22
Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever."

Eating the tree of life would cause them to live forever. What else does scripture explicitly declare can make a human live forever? If the answer is, "Nothing," then what I have already covered about A&E needing the tree of life in BOTH their good and sinless states AND their not-good and sinful states is necessarily true and the onus is on you, not me, to prove they were inherently immortal, and nothing could kill them.


Furthermore....

If Adam had fallen off of a cliff that was 2,000 feet above the ground below would he have died or not? In other words, was the law of gravity at work in Eden? What about when he left Eden to go subdue the earth? Would the otherwise normal laws of physics applied? I Adam was cutting down a tree and it happened to fall on him crushing him by its weight, would he have died, or would it have been absolutely impossible for a tree to fall on Adam?

Ot let's look at the otherwise normal process of the plants God created producing according to their own kind. A stalk of corn grows and produces ears of corn and then those ears of corn are harvested, the stalk dies, and then are either eaten or the kernels planted to produce new stalks of corn. In your version of the predisobedient world do the stalks never die and they continue unendingly to produce ears without ever dying? When the kernel is planted how does it produce a new corn stalk. Scripture says unless a seed dies it remains only a seed but if it dies it produces fruit. (Jn. 12:24). Did none of that exist? Were there never any storms that cause a plant or bush or tree to blow over? If it blew over did it die or did it continue to grow? What replenished the soil with organic material ALL plants need to live and grow and propagate?

I can list hundreds of scenarios like the above. We could literally spend every day for months debating different scenarios that would otherwise ordinarily be lethal unless you can prove the earth was a magical place where the rules of physics were different then than now.

Because the moment you concede ANY of that you must then acknowledge death existed in the world prior to Genesis 3:6-7.


My rendering of 1 Cor 15 was not wrong.

So mankind became mortal after the fall.

No, they were made mortal. Immortal creatures cannot become mortal. They are, by definition, not subject to death.

Thanks to Jesus Christ, those worthy of the first-fruits of the resurrection will be made higher than the angels thus they can never die nor marry and live in the City of God forever at the pre great tribulation rapture event being the vessels unto honor, vessels of gold & silver.

Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Those resurrected after the great tribulation will have a glorified terrestrial body where the power of the second death will not be over them, hence hinting that the power of the first death still does for why they will be marrying and the generations following them, have to go to Jerusalem to eat from the tree of life for the healing of the nations, being the vessels unto dishonor in His House, the vessels of wood & earth.

And you have thereby made God dependent on sin.


And stow the eschatological baggage. This op is about the answer to one question: Why did God plan for the fall?