Genesis 6: Could God have 'cancelled' his plans for our salvation?

[Evan]

Greetings all! Peace be upon you and your Church!

As a recent convert to Catholicism who has of late been introduced to Orthodox theology and finds it a strangely compelling alternative to the legalism of Aquinas and the Platonism of Augustine, I thought I would pose a question that I’ve been struggling with of late. Any assistance you can provide would be most welcome.

Orthodox theology, so far as I understand it, teaches that God is unchanging, at least, in respect of his ultimate plans for us. Thus, while He can be persuaded by Abraham to not destroy the just with the wicked in Sodom, and while he can make Pharaoh’s life thoroughly miserable in response to the Egyptian’s hardness of heart, He has from the beginning intended our salvation, being bound, as it were (I know I need to be careful here), by His loving nature to create and to lead His creations into loving union with Him. The Incarnation could not have not happened—God would not allow it.

How, then, are we to interpret the events in Genesis 6, wherein God seems to be determined to utterly destroy His creation, owing to the “wickedness of men,” until the testimony of Noah’s good character convinces Him to do otherwise? Was He really prepared to cancel the Incarnation? How is that compatible with the doctrine that His ultimate plans for us are not subject to change?

In Christ,
Evan

[Misha]

I think that you will find many interesting things here:
THE CURE OF THE NEUROBIOLOGICAL SICKNESS OF RELIGION (http://www.romanity.org/htm/rom.02.en.the_cure_of_the_neurobiological_sickness _of_rel.01.htm)

[Fabio Lins]

Evan,

there are people far more knowledgeable here than me and more advanced spiritually. I will give to you my opinion, also in the hope of being corrected by them.

Orthodoxy differentiates between God's essence and God's energies. God's energies are His Uncreated Grace the efusion from Him that have never started and shall know no end. It is this Grace that is "given" and "lifted". It is this that shines out from within Orthodox people specially the saints - not because of them, but because they are, literally, the Body of Christ, thus having the same "properties" as seen in the mount of transfiguration - and that is poured from outside and around the life of many non-Orthodox.

It is known that all human pertaining things in the Old Testament are but images. Just like in some icons we see "The Hand of God" coming from out of the clouds yet God's action in the world does not happen that way. Less easy to grasp is that not only human organs are used as images, but also human emotions and volitions (I am following St. Dyonisus, the Aeropagite here). Thus the "anger" of God, His "moods" and many others.

What all comes down is: how much are we participating in His Grace, in his Energies? When these energies are coming toward us and filling us, bringing us to Him, we may call this "mercy", "love". When we are distancing ourselves this we are approaching death, nothingness. God, on the other hand is always projecting His Grace upon and within us *if* we want it. When we don't, or when we need, He lifts it from us to teach us our folly. This may then be called "the wrath of God" and His allowing of the consequences of our acts to come to us "His Vengeance". But it is not His doing, it His agreeing with us to let us learn. It the famous "Well, my son, if you will not hear me do it. I will be here waiting for you." Obviously, we associate these images because that is how we feel them.

When humanity became so perverted that God's Grace could not dwell not even around them anymore, it is proper to use the image of God "deciding" to make all that happen. But we must remember that He knows everything from the beginning. Obviously He did not have to do anything to "find out" there was one man who was just. God knew Noah even before Creation and even before Creation He knew that there would be one man from whom humanity might be born again.

To put it all together, God knew from the beginning that was not the end. He did not learn anything. All words used that mean He "tests", "learns", "finds" are but images, just like "His hand" or "His Throne". When humankind got so perverted that it had nothing to do with God's Grace, it was lifted from them. That is felt by humanity as anger, pretty much like a child who thinks that his father does not like her for some punishment. When it was given back to the one man who loved God, all these movements of the Grace up and down can receive the image of God "changing His mind" which is no more precise, again, than "God's Arm" or any other image.

[Ken McRae]

As a recent convert to Catholicism who has of late been introduced to Orthodox theology and finds it a strangely compelling alternative to the legalism of Aquinas and the Platonism of Augustine, ...

While Aquinas is highly esteemed by most Catholics as "their" Angelic Doctor, there were many Catholic mystics and theologians, of more Neoplatonic bent than Aquinas, who have parted ways him on several accounts. This is fact too well attested to in the literature. And while I am most certainly curious about what you refer to as "the legalism of Aqunias," I am even more so interested in what you mean exactly by "the Platonism of Augustine." I take it you are referring to his Christian "Neoplatonism." However, the way you state the matter makes it sound as if you think Orthodoxy has either not been influenced at all by Neoplatonism, or has not been influenced by it to the same degree as "Augustine" and the West. Such a view of Orthodoxy, though, is entirely mistaken, as will appear from the following online articles:-

01) Orthodoxy and Platonism: An Exchange of Letters with Protestant Apologist Douglas Jones (http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/jones_letters.aspx)
02) The Christian Neoplatonism of St. Maximus the Confessor (http://www.quodlibet.net/moore-maximus.shtml)
03) Gregory of Nazianzus: Images and Reflections (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2006/2006-09-07.html)
04) Augustine and Christian Platonism (http://www.augustinian.villanova.edu/AugustinianStudies/armstrng.htm)


... He has from the beginning intended our salvation, being bound, as it were (I know I need to be careful here), by His loving nature to create and to lead His creations into loving union with Him. The Incarnation could not have not happened—God would not allow it.

The Heavenly Father was bound by the "immutability of his counsel (Heb. 6:17)," from "before the foundation of the world," (Eph. 1:4) and by the several oaths or promises which He swore to: "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." (Isa. 55:11) Thus, you see, "the Incarnation could not have not happened," as you say, without making a lier out of God. That is the argument put forth, for example, by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews:-

"When God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, 'Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.' And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation ... etc. " (Heb. 6:13-18)

However, long before Abraham, he swore an oath to Noah, and long before Noah, he swore an oath to the First Eve, and long before her, he swore an oath to the Second Person of the Trinity:

01) Isa. 53:10-12 "It pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

02) "The LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." (Gen. 3:14-15)

So, you see, the Heavenly Father was bound by his own Eternal Word, and if you wish to call that "legalism," well, then, go ahead, I suppose, but I prefer to call it the divinely inspired truth of Scripture.


Was He really prepared to cancel the Incarnation?

Insofar as it is infinitely impossible for God to lie, then I think the answer to this question is self-evident.

[Evan]

Evan,

there are people far more knowledgeable here than me and more advanced spiritually. I will give to you my opinion, also in the hope of being corrected by them.

Orthodoxy differentiates between God's essence and God's energies. God's energies are His Uncreated Grace the efusion from Him that have never started and shall know no end. It is this Grace that is "given" and "lifted". It is this that shines out from within Orthodox people specially the saints - not because of them, but because they are, literally, the Body of Christ, thus having the same "properties" as seen in the mount of transfiguration - and that is poured from outside and around the life of many non-Orthodox.

It is known that all human pertaining things in the Old Testament are but images. Just like in some icons we see "The Hand of God" coming from out of the clouds yet God's action in the world does not happen that way. Less easy to grasp is that not only human organs are used as images, but also human emotions and volitions (I am following St. Dyonisus, the Aeropagite here). Thus the "anger" of God, His "moods" and many others.

What all comes down is: how much are we participating in His Grace, in his Energies? When these energies are coming toward us and filling us, bringing us to Him, we may call this "mercy", "love". When we are distancing ourselves this we are approaching death, nothingness. God, on the other hand is always projecting His Grace upon and within us *if* we want it. When we don't, or when we need, He lifts it from us to teach us our folly. This may then be called "the wrath of God" and His allowing of the consequences of our acts to come to us "His Vengeance". But it is not His doing, it His agreeing with us to let us learn. It the famous "Well, my son, if you will not hear me do it. I will be here waiting for you." Obviously, we associate these images because that is how we feel them.

When humanity became so perverted that God's Grace could not dwell not even around them anymore, it is proper to use the image of God "deciding" to make all that happen. But we must remember that He knows everything from the beginning. Obviously He did not have to do anything to "find out" there was one man who was just. God knew Noah even before Creation and even before Creation He knew that there would be one man from whom humanity might be born again.

To put it all together, God knew from the beginning that was not the end. He did not learn anything. All words used that mean He "tests", "learns", "finds" are but images, just like "His hand" or "His Throne". When humankind got so perverted that it had nothing to do with God's Grace, it was lifted from them. That is felt by humanity as anger, pretty much like a child who thinks that his father does not like her for some punishment. When it was given back to the one man who loved God, all these movements of the Grace up and down can receive the image of God "changing His mind" which is no more precise, again, than "God's Arm" or any other image.


Fabio-- this is beautiful and highly instructive. What tripped me up initially was the language in Genesis 6:8-- the "But" makes it seem like God suddenly noticed Noah. Further, while it's easy to understand God proclaiming that he is a "jealous God" in order to get a certain response to Moses, it's more difficult here because God's not talking to anybody, yet He gives the impression of emoting like an ordinary human being.

Obviously, Scripture and Tradition are clear as to God's constancy as regards his "major" determinations, even if they allow that He acts temporally at certain junctures in response to what He sees transpiring. The trouble is keeping this in mind when God, in the Old Testament, reveals Himself directly in the only way we can understand-- that is, in human language, expressing His judgments by projecting similitudes of human emotions. What we have to keep in mind is that, as you say, these are icons, and cannot be taken at face value (with the exception of the giving of the Law, which seems straightforward enough). A God who emoted and made decisions on impulse as we do would be a god made in OUR own image.

[Peter S.]

Christ could only have died in the way he did. Que sera sera.

Peter