Would you recommend that book? I’ve been looking for something like it.
It’s a mystery. Its’ not the same as saying God willed evil. But I think as mystery it does have profound truth and as such I agree with you Cindy.
I think if Christianity if focussed completely on PSA it will seem like an appalling heresy probably. But if it is focussed on the Incarnation (even if you also believe in PSA) it will not seem so foreign. God always planned to complete creation by taking on human subjectivity in Godmanhood according to Iranaeus. God did so that we might share in this subjectivity to grow from the broken image into the likeness of God. God was always no our side and intimately interested in us.
I think perhaps the idea of the fortunate fall is also foreign to traditions that stress God’s predestination. It fits in with an idea of God’s providence but not of divine predestination. The focus is on human freedom - on God wanting us to be free, needing us to be free so that we may grow up properly, but also being intimately involved with us (rather than either an absent parent or an over controlling one)
I’m still thinking about Mary btw. I think the respect given to Mary in Orthodoxy – as long as it does not flip into worship – makes more sense in this tradition (and makes sense of her mention in the carol). According to some Protestant exegesis the miracle of parthenogenesis is the only interesting thing about the Virgin Birth. God could have chosen any old virgin – he just happened to chose Mary. But this does scant justice to the Annunciation stories and to the Magnificat. God chose Mary because she was Mary. And we are chosen through here begin chosen first – all generations are blessed in a sense through her (although not by her). So as such she is a forerunner of redeemed humanity – of what we may be and will be – not only by virtue of Jesus’ death for her (and us), but also because God chose her to be instrumental in the Incarnation. Hope that makes some sense 
(it just occurred to me)
love
Dick 
Beautiful, Dick – like a song. You should make that into a poem. (edit: I mean in particular the things you said about Mary.)
Dave, you said:
What I mean by “mere innocence” is the innocence as of a small child. He is all goodness and light (well, in theory!) but he’s never been tested. The child is good, but he’s more or less an empty vessel. He’s never developed his moral musculature or stood in the face of real temptation. Even regarding the choice of fruit, Adam fell flat. What if it were something REALLY tempting, like chocolate! He’s never had the opportunity to sacrifice himself for some other one, whom he loved (or didn’t). What kind of man would it be, who had no more experience than a babe? This is where we start. It isn’t God’s desire we should end there.
Now I don’t believe Father NEEDED us to fall in order to develop us into mature children. I believe He knew that we WOULD, but that He could have taught us as un-rebellious children too. This is just the way it all fell out for us. Maybe it could have been otherwise. It would have been different, but I don’t think Father settles for loss. If there’s a setback, then the recovery will set us higher than we could have gone before – because that’s just the way He is. When I mess up on a painting I don’t worry. I didn’t want that to happen, but I’ll make it right and make the painting much better than it would have been without my mistake. God always makes things better, no matter how much we carry on making it worse. However, I think we humans have gone quite far enough in the wrong direction! Time to wake up and start for home! 
Love, Cindy
For the large majority of conservative Western Christians, God cursed mankind after the disobedience of Adam and Eva with a sinful nature making sin inevitable, the sheer immorality (and blasphemy) of this teaching notwithstanding.
It seems to me that the sinful nature was there before any disobedience. Eve lusted with her eyes, her heart and her pride before she made a move. John describes these things as the sins of the world. They were in her prior to her testing. She also lied about God’s command not to eat of the tree by adding that God said not to touch it.
I think what happened in the garden was meant to happen but not in the Calvinist understanding.
That’s very perceptive, Steve.
Eve lusted with her eyes, her heart and her pride before she made a move.
I think that’s true and I had not thought of it in that way.
However - that ‘meant to happen’ phrase - I just don’t know.
I agree that the fall was “meant to happen”. I believe that the flood of Noah’s day was anticipated with the canopy of water on day 2 of creation; and that “by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire” because it is “meant to happen”. The Elect of God are meant to see God as He really is, and the first-fruits were meant to be given the same immortal body as Christ, and the marriage of the lamb was always meant to happen. These are deep mysteries that have not been explored by the church as yet.
However - that ‘meant to happen’ phrase - I just don’t know.
God could have kept Satan out of the Garden but he didn’t, why not?
God could have put the tree in the far corner of the garden but instead He put it right in the center, why?
Exactly!
The Elect of God are meant to see God as He really is, and the first-fruits were meant to be given the same immortal body as Christ, and the marriage of the lamb was always meant to happen. These are deep mysteries that have not been explored by the church as yet.
Steve,
Are all the elect now living together in Queensland waiting for the rapture? 
Seriously though what do you mean by elect and also these “first-fruits” ,
having an immortal body, are you distinguishing them from another group?
God could have kept Satan out of the Garden but he didn’t, why not?
God could have put tree in the far corner of the garden but instead He put it right in the center, why?
I kind of think God knows more than we do. To read into those questions that God meant for evil to happen - no way IMO. To test his creatures - sure - the only way for them to grow was to be tested and to overcome, apparently.
It’s so easy to just ask Why? about everything. I think anything God does is well-intentioned with no shadow of turning and nothing to hide. From that premise - and it’s a matter of faith, nothing I can ‘prove’ - I reject any suggestion that God desired evil in any way, talking in the context of the Garden.
I’m satisfied with that, myself. We’re splashing around in deep mysteries and I don’t want to go off the deep end.
It’s so easy to just ask Why? about everything. I think anything God does is well-intentioned with no shadow of turning and nothing to hide. From that premise - and it’s a matter of faith, nothing I can ‘prove’ - I reject any suggestion that God desired evil in any way, talking in the context of the Garden.
I’m satisfied with that, myself. We’re splashing around in deep mysteries and I don’t want to go off the deep end.
I agree everything God does is well intentioned and though asking “why” may be easy i tend to think God does want us to think about stuff. So just for the record i think “evil” in the hands of man is the equivalent of sin but “evil” as God sees fit to use it is a tool for us to learn from.
I think God wants us to learn and mature and to do that we must experience evil, so eventually we learn to overcome it. We learn by contrasting things like good and evil or light vs dark or love vs hate.
I’m a little touchy, sorry - I keep reading Enn’s essay in another thread and am really annoyed by his propensity to just ask whywhwywhywhwhy instead of coming out with what he means to actually say, or put in the place of that which he wants to destroy. I took it out on you - my bad.
I do feel like we first need to be nourished in the Lord, rooted and grounded in His Love and fulfilling His commandments BEFORE we try to answer every question - I guess we would all agree to that. Because every question will NOT be answered, ever.
I think that every important question about where we came from, and where we are going, and everything in between that affects the human situation, is in the Bible. I think it is inerrant in matters of doctrine. It DOES have to be interpreted correctly, of course.
My comments were intentionally and specifically related to the narrative in the Garden. Since then, God has used (He has not committed) evil to bring about good.
Questions - of course. We all ask them and I hope you continue to.
I wish!
Yes. I think there are several different bodies and destinations (not speaking about a firey hell pit). Quoting from the early church father from 120 AD, Papais:
"As the presbyters say, those who are deemed worthy of a habitation in heaven will go there, others will enjoy the delights of Paradise, and others will possess the splendor of the city. For everywhere the Savior will be seen according to the worthiness of those who see Him. . . . There is a distinction between the habitation of those who produce a hundred-fold, and the habitation of those who produce sixty-fold, and the habitation of those who produce thirty-fold. For the first class will be taken up into the heavens. The second class will dwell in Paradise. And the last will inhabit the city. It is for that reason that the Lord said, “In my Father’s house are many mansions.”
Papias (120 AD), Fragment of Papias, Chapter 5, as cited by Eusebius.
This view is repeated by many of the earliest dathers, and I believe it is the view best supported by scripture.