Why didn’t God merely create those beings which He foreknew would keep their sanity and follow God’s plan for their happiness and abundant joy? By so doing, God would have spared the world all this misery and conflict.

I am not saying, Why didn’t God create robots, but why did He not create only those beings which He knew, through their own intelligent, free wiIl, and choice, would not rebel because they could see God was good and wanted only their joy?

If God really loved us, it would seem He would spare us this great controversy by simply refraining from creating Satan and the rest of the angels and men who fell.

Keen minds have struggled with this one!

What would have happened if God had create(l only people he knew would always love an(l obey him? Would their love and loyalty have bad any meaning?

Love and loyalty are only meaningful when a person has the freedom and ability to distrust and rebel. God could not have eliminated just the people He knew would rebel. He would have had to eliminate the possibility of rebellion from all people whom He created. And that, as you have suggested, would have left God with a universe full of useless robots.

It is often assumed that God’s foreknowledge means that God doesn’t do anything until He cheeks forward to see what the outcome of the action will be, and then He acts accordingly. This makes God a captive of His own foreknowledge . Surely what God does, He does with sufficient wisdom that He need to revise it every time He looks ahead to the outcome. When God created people with the ability to rebel, He knew the risk He was taking—and considered the act worth the risk.

It’s tempting to think God’s love would have been more clearly made known by shielding us from sin and controversy. But Cod’s love is more profoundly revealed by redeeming us from the effects of our rebellion


Why did Christ say in Matthew 5:32, “He that divorces his wife has caused her to commit adultery”? This seems grossly unfair to the woman who is “put away.” Why should she be branded as an adulteress?

It helps to understand that Jesus was speaking out against the customs of His day in which it was commonly taught that a nan could divorce his wife for something as trivial as her allowing his food to burn!

Such a divorced wife would then set out to find a new husband, thinking that she had ample Bible grounds for her divorce. And actually, she didn’t have. Jesus message was in reality a thrust at the husbands, warning then not to put their wives into such au unscriptural position by their frivolous view of marriage and divorce.

To make His point even stronger, Jesus actually warned that a man would thus make his wife out to be an adulteress, something that no self—respecting Jew of the day would wish to do in public!

And so Jesus’ counsel was actually a protection for the wife, rather than a slam against her. It greatly narrowed the grounds upon which she could be (divorced, allowing only the case in which she had been unfaithful through the act of adultery. And in that case, she would deserve the title. In brief, Jesus was saying, Don’t give her the title unless she deserves it!

bar_blbk.jpg - 5566 Bytes

Return to the Words of Wisdom, inspired menu..

Return to the main menu..

D.U.O Project
Church of the Science of God
La Jolla, California 92038-3131
(858) 220-1604

Church of the Science of GOD, 1993
Web Designed by WebDiva