And yet, God forenew that Lucifer would sin, just as He foreknew that Judas would betray Him.

Daryl, why do you say, "and yet"? You're simply avoiding the point of my post. I'm asking IF the future is as you are suggesting, then WHY would God have created Lucifer knowing he would (not might) sin? You can't reasonably answer a question like this with "any yet ..." A reasonable answer would begin, "This is why God preferred a world with sin over a world without sin" (then provide the answer).

You're just re-asserting the very thing I'm questioning. That's not helpful.

Also I've asked you for almost a month now how, under your view of the future, heaven could be in danger. Of particular interest to me is why you've decided not to answer my question. Surely you've noticed me asking it, since I asked you it probably a dozen times.

Do you think this is a reasonable way to carry on a dialog? When you ask me questions, I answer them. When you make points, I respond. But I cannot carry on a dialog with you, because you won't respond to my points, or answer my questions.

Again, by asking this you are concerned with the final result, while Ellen White was concerned with the threat posed to Christ. If the conflict was real, the threat was real.

That Christ foresaw His victory she says clearly:

“Ages before His incarnation, Christ distinctly chose His position. He foresaw His life of humiliation, His rejection and crucifixion, His victory over satanic agencies, His victory over death and the grave. He saw the world flooded with light and life, and heard the song of triumph sung by the millions rescued from the hold of Satan.” {1NL 41.7}

What's the answer to the question? Before the fact, say 1000 B.C., what was the probability that Christ would fail? Was it 0? Or was it greater than 0?

I can't tell from reading your post what your answer to this question is.

Tom, the quotes I posted clearly say God knew ahead of time that Lucifer and Adam and Eve would sin.

The reason why God chose to create them, in spite of the fact He knew they would sin, is also clearly stated in the quotes I posted. He knew they would sin, but it did not deter Him from carrying out His eternal purpose. That is, knowing they would sin did not stop Him from creating them.

Here is the reason given: "But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter Him from carrying out His eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish His throne in righteousness."

AG 129
The purpose and plan of grace existed from all eternity. Before the foundation of the world it was according to the determinate counsel of God that man should be created, endowed with power to do the divine will. But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter Him from carrying out His eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish His throne in righteousness. God knows the end from the beginning. . . . Therefore redemption was not an afterthought . . . but an eternal purpose to be wrought out for the blessing not only of this atom of a world but for the good of all the worlds which God has created. {AG 129.2}

I don't think you've gotten the question. Please try to get it! I'm interested in your thoughts on it.

God did not have to create Lucifer. God not only foresaw what would happen had he created Lucifer, but foresaw what would have happened had he created a different angel in the place of Lucifer, which we can call Lucifer II. Now there were an unlimited number of possibilities for God in creating Lucifer. We'll arbitrarily say there were a trillion. Let's say that of these trillion that 5 would choose to sin, and the other 999,999,999,995 would not. Why would God choose to create a model that would sin over one that would not?

A key thing to bear in mind is that God was in no way compelled to create the Lucifer model which sinned. Since Lucifer I did not exist, God was in no way violating his free will. Lucifer II (a model which would not have sinned), had just as much "right" to exist as Lucifer I, which did sin.

The statements you quoted tell us that God was able to further His purposes in spite of sin; that is, God would not permit sin to prevent Him from carrying out His purposes. However, it does not address why God would prefer having sin in the universe over not having it.

So, in conclusion, to repeat the question, why would God choose a universe which has sin in it over one that does not?

TE: ... why would God choose a universe which has sin in it over one that does not?

MM: Your question assumes there were other options which did not involve sin and death. I disagree that such options existed. For if such options existed surely God would have pursued them. The fact He did not pursue them is evidence such options did not exist. Since God is infinitely perfect, other "options" are not viable; perfection is the only viable option. The way God did it is the only way, the only right way. All other "options" are, therefore, inferior, and as such not viable.

TE: ... why would God choose a universe which has sin in it over one that does not?

MM: Your question assumes there were other options which did not involve sin and death. I disagree that such options existed.

Unless you wish to assert that the mere creation of angels necessitated sin coming about, there was the option available to create angels in such a way that sin would not happen. Why would God choose to create angels in such a way that sin would happen as opposed to it not happening?

Or do you wish to assert that it was impossible for God to create angels without sin happening?

Surely there was an option available for God to create angels (or other creatures) in such a way that sin would not happen - it was creating them without free will.


Well, if you take as a basis God's foreknowledge, I think we could say it was 0, since God sees the end from the beginning; if you take as a basis the threat posed to Christ, I think we could say it was the maximum possible for a human being (I don't know how to calculate it).
When you ask about a concrete past event rather than a potential or theoretical event, the "probabilities" are always exactly one, or 100% (meaning that it happened) or exactly zero (meaning that it didn't). But the person asking the question usually means to ask "what were the chances of that?" — an entirely different question.
A post-hoc or posterior probability and a prior probability are two different things. God has a posterior probabability, because He sees future events as past. Take God's foreknowledge out of the picture, and you will have the real probability.
Take a look at this article and at the example given of the woman who got pregnant: http://www.jeremymiles.co.uk/learningstats/2006/07/what-is-probability.html

Rosangela and Mountain Man are both doing a good job in answering your question, therefore, I do not really have anything else to add except for the fact that God wants all of His creation, which includes Heaven itself, to be inhabited by those who have the freedom of choice. Other names for this are those who have freewill, those who are free moral agents. God doesn't want His creation to be inhabited by those who are robotic in their response to God's will. This is why, even though He foresaw the entrance of sin in one of His angels, and the entrance of sin in one of His inhabited planets, He went ahead and created Lucifer and Adam and Eve. The fact that God also foresaw the solution to sin through the Plan of Salvation through His Son, is another reason why He permitted it all to happen as it happened, even to this very day.

I hope this finally answers the questions you were requesting of me.