Arminians and Calvinists are a subset of Christendom. Who cars whether Arminians agree with Calvinists on something. philosophically What does the Bible say? It certainly does not say anyrhing like "God ordained the fall." Not that "Before God created He already knew whaat the future would be."
On the other hand, there is Eph 1:11. If God did not decree the Fall then this means sin that was spiritually and physically catastrophically disastrous to our first parents and to this earth found into this world apart from God's will. And this implies that someone or something is greater than God and was able to bring evil into God's "very good" creation in spite of God's goodness, power, and knowledge. How do we know evil will not intrude again in the eternal, visible kingdom?
To make the fall impossible, for limited beings, God would have had to make love impossible.
Huh? Why is love impossible without sin in the world? The three Persons of the Godhead did not love each other in eternity before the creation? Or The Father did not love his sinless, perfectly righteous, holy Son Jesus because he wasn't a sinner? And there will be no love, I suppose, in the eternal, visible, sinless kingdom in the next age?
Implying that my view is that evil coming into the universe was a surprise for God is a strawman. God was not surprised, he knew it was possible. Why else would He say, "Man has become LIKE US, knowing both good and evil. God had obviously encountered evil before, and knew how it comes about. But Adam and Eve choosing to distrust God and instead trust the devil, was not inevitable.
Well, you pretty much said that God was taken by surprise at Hezekiah's reaction to the prophet's bad news about the king's imminent death, which is why God changed his mind. So there is that.
You ask, "Wouldn't a loving human parent not do all in their power to protect their child from imminent danger thereby preserving the child's welfare?" No, helicopter mothers are stunting their children's growth toward maturity.
So, is this modern philosophy of parental care (i.e. "helicopter mothers") found in the bible? I supposed Mary and Joseph should have ignored angel's warning and command to let the Christ child deal with Herod? Survival of the fittest and all of that, right? What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger?
But what happens when the "helicopter" crashes and burns? A mother warns her 7 year old to never cross the street without first stopping at the corner and looking both ways, whether on foot or bicycle. But one day, her little one is in the street racing other kids on their bikes and the mother is sitting on the stoop of her house on a corner and perceives that her child is not going to stop at the corner where a car is fast approaching because sees her kid is intent and engrossed on winning the race. I guess in your world a mere "warning" is synonymous with protection, so the the mom should just sit tight and not move and see what happens when/if that car meets up with a child's bicycle, right? After all, how many warnings should a kid get, right?
Don't you know that the scriptures teach that the strong are supposed to protect the weak and vulnerable, even as the Lord protects them!? See Ps 12:5; 41:1; 72:13; 82:3-4; Act 20:35, etc. And are not sheep among the most weak and vulnerable animals upon the earth, which is why they need shepherds to protect them!? Did not David himself rescue sheep from the jaws of death of both lion and bear? Isn't Jesus supposed to be our Good Shepherd? What does a shepherd do: Only warn his sheep!? But evidently Jesus never got the memo on "helicopter moms".
You ask, "Isn't one of the qualities of "agape" love is that it "protects" (1Cor 13:7)?" But you did not quote the verse and highlight where it mentions "protect". Because it doesn't say protect. You rad that into the text, like you do so many other things into so many other texts. You wrest two specific events of God protecting from other parts of the Bible, and hitch then to 1 Cor. 13:7 as if they are related to 1 Cor. 13:7 , which does not mention protecting at all. This is a typical Calvinist practice.
Actually, two of my versions of the NIV does say "protect"!
1 Cor 13:7
7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
NIV
And God does protect his own, don't you know?
2 Thess 3:3
3 But the Lord is faithful, and he will strengthen and protect you from the evil one.
NIV
Hmm...except when He doesn't, I suppose?
BUT....protect is what God does...Ps 23:1-7; 32:7; Isa 43:2, etc.
You ask, "If God knew how to protect Sarah from a wicked king, then why didn't he protect Eve from the Serpent?" God did protect Eve from the serpent. He had told Eve the truth. She was forewarned and forearmed. She chose not to use the weaponry God had supplied that would have kept her safe. How will anyone learn the danger of some threat, if they are delivered every time from ever engaging with the threat?
So, in your world a "warning = actual, real time protection? Also, you conveniently overlook that fact that the warning God gave Adam (NOT Eve!) warned about
fatal consequences. It's one thing for parents to allow their kids to learn lessons the hard way that they'll soon not forget, yet something else altogether to learn a hard lesson from which they'll never recover!
Now, having said all that, allow me to turn up the heat up some by pointing to one of the two huge elephants (as if one weren't bad enough) that were hiding in plain sight in the Garden.
Elephant Number One: Satan! Please explain how the Evil One entered God's "very good" pristine creation apart from the Creator's decree. If there had been no Satan in the Garden, would there have been a fall? How did Satan get there? We have to infer that Lucifer already fell and was cast down from heaven...so, why didn't God cast him down directly to the fires of hell, which he has prepared for him the other fallen angels (Mat 25:41)?
