God's Plan & The Flood

[Gene Parmesan]

You are absolutely wrong. God has always known eternally everything, but He has chosen a given course of history because through this specific choice He has lead more souls to conversion and eternal salvation. God has chosen to crete men with a free will, therefore He cannot save men against their own will; He must convince men to abandon evil and sin and accept to be sanctified by His grace
Personally I do not believe that the story of the flood is to be interpreted literally; the purpose of story of the flood is to teach that the consequence of sin is death and that we can be saved only if we accept to obey God's commandments, which teaches us what is really good.

Do you believe in Heaven or a New Earth and will people have free will in either case?

 

[mmarco]

Do you believe in Heaven or a New Earth and will people have free will in either case?

The purpose of free will is to freely choose to trust God entirely and to freely accept to be sanctified by God. In other words, the purpose of our free will is to freely choose to renounce to our free will forever. This means that we must freely accept that God fix our will towards the true good forever, so that we can be in fully communion with God forever.
In heaven we can never want to sin because our will is totally conformed to God's will.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

The purpose of free will is to freely choose to trust God entirely and to freely accept to be sanctified by God. In other words, the purpose of our free will is to freely choose to renounce to our free will forever. This means that we must freely accept that God fix our will towards the true good forever, so that we can be in fully communion with God forever.
In heaven we can never want to sin because our will is totally conformed to God's will.

Why do some people choose to accept God and some don't?

 

[mmarco]

Why do some people choose to accept God and some don't?

I am not God and I don't have all the answers. What I know is that I understand that God is the source of all good, all true love and all true goodness and He is absolutely worthy to be trusted entirely. I also know that some people do not trust God and desire to go on sinning. I also think that some people unawarely convince themselves that God does not exist, so that they can feel free to go on sinning without the fear to be punished.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I am not God and I don't have all the answers. What I know is that I understand that God is the source of all good, all true love and all true goodness and He is absolutely worthy to be trusted entirely. I also know that some people do not trust God and desire to go on sinning. I also think that some people unawarely convince themselves that God does not exist, so that they can feel free to go on sinning without the fear to be punished.

So something causes people to give into their desire to sin but others are able to overcome that. What is the source of these differences among people?

 

[mmarco]

So something causes people to give into their desire to sin but others are able to overcome that. What is the source of these differences among people?

The source of these differences is free will; we are free to choose, which means that people can make different choices

 

[aiki]

What we are talking about is not simply foreknowledge, is it?

God's divine capacities extend beyond omniscience. But in regards to His foreknowing of things, it is important to acknowledge, I think, that such foreknowledge doesn't necessarily equate to causation. It is this mistaken belief that it does, that foreknowledge must entail causation, that I most often run into when talking to unbelievers about the God revealed in Scripture.

It's not just that I've had a cat for a long time and I can predict with a fairly high accuracy the cat will behave in a certain way. It's more like I know exactly what my cat will do and I also created the cat myself and imbued within it the instinct and propensity to enjoy knocking things over and then be disappointed when it knocks my mug onto the tile floor.

God has made us in His image which means, among other things, that we have at various points genuine free agency. Of course, this freedom of choice is constrained by the way in which God has made us. We don't have wings sprouting from our backs that allow us to fly about like a bird, or the physical characteristics of a whale that would allow us to swim the ocean depths, we can't eat rocks for nourishment, or beat up a grizzly with our bare (pun intended) hands. About a number of things, then, we are constrained in our choices. But in the matter of the morality of our conduct, in regards to our response to the innate knowledge of God we all possess, we do have free agency and can choose to embrace God or deny Him.

You're limiting God to just knower-of-things with this example.

No, I'm simply focusing on an important point concerning His omniscience that is commonly misunderstood. Such focus isn't an attempt to limit or ignore the other features of God's nature.

If God knew He'd need the flood and He could have done things differently, then the Flood would indeed be His will. Anything else limits His knowledge or His power.

Well, I don't think "need" is the right word when talking of God's choice to flood the earth in judgment upon Man's wickedness. He could have used some other catastrophic means of punishing the evil of mankind, yes. But whatever He's chosen to do, as God, the Creator and Sustainer of everything, He has a unique divine prerogative to do so unilaterally. It's His universe; God is the Ultimate Sovereign within it; He can do whatever He wills in His Creation, which He sustains at every moment.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

The source of these differences is free will; we are free to choose, which means that people can make different choices

Something causes some people to choose not to follow God while others choose to. If it's "free will" that is the difference, then do we all have different "free will?" No, I think "free will" would be the framework in which the differences themselves (whatever they are) can manifest. We all share that framework, so it's not "free will" that is determining the difference. So, what causes some people to choose to follow God or not?

 

[Gene Parmesan]

God's divine capacities extend beyond omniscience. But in regards to His foreknowing of things, it is important to acknowledge, I think, that such foreknowledge doesn't necessarily equate to causation. It is this mistaken belief that it does, that foreknowledge must entail causation, that I most often run into when talking to unbelievers about the God revealed in Scripture.



God has made us in His image which means, among other things, that we have at various points genuine free agency. Of course, this freedom of choice is constrained by the way in which God has made us. We don't have wings sprouting from our backs that allow us to fly about like a bird, or the physical characteristics of a whale that would allow us to swim the ocean depths, we can't eat rocks for nourishment, or beat up a grizzly with our bare (pun intended) hands. About a number of things, then, we are constrained in our choices. But in the matter of the morality of our conduct, in regards to our response to the innate knowledge of God we all possess, we do have free agency and can choose to embrace God or deny Him.



No, I'm simply focusing on an important point concerning His omniscience that is commonly misunderstood. Such focus isn't an attempt to limit or ignore the other features of God's nature, however.



Well, I don't think "need" is the right word when talking of God's choice to flood the earth in judgment upon Man's wickedness. He could have used some other catastrophic means of punishing the evil of mankind, yes. But whatever He's chosen to do, as God, the Creator and Sustainer of everything, He has a unique divine prerogative to enact unilaterally. It's His universe; God is the Ultimate Sovereign within it; He can do whatever He wills in His Creation, which He sustains at every moment.

Flood, fire, flesh-eating nano robots. I'm less interested in the method God used to reset humanity and more curious if that was the intention all along. If God knew that if He created man and gave them their spirit and instincts and brain structures and what not in just such a way that they would eventually need to be wiped out, and He could have done differently, was The Flood (or any event) going to be necessary? And if He did do that and if He is powerful enough to have created things differently, is The Flood then not exactly what God had intended (whether He is happy about it or not)?

So, there's supposedly going to be a new Kingdom and it's going to be a lot better than this Earth. We know God has the capability to create that, if we can trust the Bible, right? So the fact that He didn't go straight to that from the very beginning indicates (should we assume God's knowledge transcends time) that God felt the Flood was important and is part of His will from before He created man.

 

[mmarco]

Something causes some people to choose not to follow God while others choose to. If it's "free will" that is the difference, then do we all have different "free will?" No, I think "free will" would be the framework in which the differences themselves (whatever they are) can manifest. We all share that framework, so it's not "free will" that is determining the difference. So, what causes some people to choose to follow God or not?

As I have already said, it is free will. You seem not to accept the concept itself of free will.
God has the power to create beings who are free to choose to trust Him or to reject Him; this is the power of God.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

As I have already said, it is free will. You seem not to accept the concept itself of free will.
God has the power to create beings who are free to choose to trust Him or to reject Him; this is the power of God.

Let's say you and I have free will. Whatever free will is, we have the same thing. I have free will, you have free will. Now, you choose to follow God, I choose not to. If we were both given this same capacity, why has free will lead to you choosing God but not me?

 

[mmarco]

Let's say you and I have free will. Whatever free will is, we have the same thing. I have free will, you have free will. Now, you choose to follow God, I choose not to. If we were both given this same capacity, why has free will lead to you choosing God but not me?

As I have said, free will is what allows each of us to make a free choice; God has the power to create beings with the capacity to make a free choice.
We are therefore fully responsible of our choice to trust or reject God.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

As I have said, free will is what allows each of us to make a free choice; God has the power to create beings with the capacity to make a free choice.
We are therefore fully responsible of our choice to trust or reject God.

I'll just keep trying, if that's alright. What makes you utilize your free will differently than me?

 

[mmarco]

I'll just keep trying, if that's alright. What makes you utilize your free will differently than me?

It's free will that make us utilize our own free will to make free choices.
God has the power to create beings with the capacity to freely utilize their own will; this is the concept of free will.

 

[TedT]

The source of these differences is free will; we are free to choose, which means that people can make different choices

The ability to chose does not prove our wills are free from any force that causes it to choose in a certain controlled direction or purpose...especially for sinners.

How does our ability to choose free us from the enslaving, addictive like compulsion to choose some evil in every decision no matter how good that decision seems on the surface?

 

[TedT]

If God knew He'd need the flood and He could have done things differently, then the Flood would indeed be His will. Anything else limits His knowledge or His power.

To me,
that GOD chose before the foundation of the world to teach HIS sinful elect a lesson about sin and judgment on a worldly level is proof that HE knew it was a perfect lesson for that time and for the rest of worldly time.

He created us for a purpose and the things of this world all perfectly bring the sinful elect into position wherein HE can finally fulfill HIS purpose. Amen.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

To me,
that GOD chose before the foundation of the world to teach HIS sinful elect a lesson about sin and judgment on a worldly level is proof that HE knew it was a perfect lesson for that time and for the rest of worldly time.

He created us for a purpose and the things of this world all perfectly bring the sinful elect into position wherein HE can finally fulfill HIS purpose. Amen.

While I could never know the mind of God, it is a struggle to understand why exactly creating a bunch of sinful people just to kill them and start over is the best way to make the His point, I respect that you admit it was all intentional and according to God's will.

 

[Psalm 27]

If "The Flood" was a literal event that happened, was the need to start over the result of things not going according to God's Will? Or was The Flood always a part of God's plan?

The Bible says that The Lord regretted that He had made humankind. (Because of their wickedness Gen. 6:6)

In the end, He came to earth to take away their/our sins.

It’s almost like He thought, If you want a job doing, do it yourself.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

The Bible says that The Lord regretted that He had made humankind. (Because of their wickedness Gen. 6:6)

In the end, He came to earth to take away their/our sins.

It’s almost like He thought, If you want a job doing, do it yourself.

Yes, that is fair. The Lord regretted that He had made humankind and He intervened to correct things. He must have not foreseen what would happen. Or if He did, He lacked the ability or the desire to create humanity in a way where the flood would be unnecessary.

 

[aiki]

Flood, fire, flesh-eating nano robots. I'm less interested in the method God used to reset humanity and more curious if that was the intention all along.

Knowing what people will freely choose to do, God fashions a response. Being omniscient, God has always known what people in every time and place - and in every possible time and place - will (and would) do. And so, we can say He has always intended to respond to their choices in the way He has (and will).

If God knew that if He created man and gave them their spirit and instincts and brain structures and what not in just such a way that they would eventually need to be wiped out, and He could have done differently, was The Flood (or any event) going to be necessary?

It is possible that, in all possible worlds God could have created populated by creatures capable of freely choosing to know and love Him, the world in which we live is the one world out of all of these possible worlds in which the maximum number of people would do so. If God is good as well as omniscient, then this is what we'd expect He would do. Our world, then, reflects God's goodness and our free agency rather than mere deterministic divine sovereignty.

And if He did do that and if He is powerful enough to have created things differently, is The Flood then not exactly what God had intended (whether He is happy about it or not)?

Is God able to create a world in which more people freely come to know and love Him than our own? If God is good - which I believe He is - He would have created such a world, it seems to me. That He didn't, indicates to me that such a world is not possible.

Doesn't God's omnipotence mean He can do anything? No, I don't think so. God can do anything that is logically possible for Him to do. And He can do anything that corresponds to His nature as the "Greatest Possible Being" that we see described in the Bible. But Scripture tells us God cannot lie, He cannot be unfaithful to Himself, He cannot tempt Man to evil, and so on; there are things God cannot do. Creating a world where fewer than the very maximum who could freely come to know and love Him actually do, would contravene His good and loving divine nature, which is impossible.

So, there's supposedly going to be a new Kingdom and it's going to be a lot better than this Earth. We know God has the capability to create that, if we can trust the Bible, right? So the fact that He didn't go straight to that from the very beginning indicates (should we assume God's knowledge transcends time) that God felt the Flood was important and is part of His will from before He created man.

The Flood was important as the appropriate response of a holy, just God to the freely-chosen wickedness of humanity. If humanity had chosen to act differently, to live in righteous fellowship with God instead, in His omniscience, God would have known it and responded accordingly.