IMO, real divine power is completely contingent on consent and concurrence, so even a detour is not enough. The offered plan must be better than all available alternatives. If the folks in charge promoted a plan significantly inferior to a ready alternative, I would say they would likely suffer a loss of confidence. I can’t imagine a flood like decision being undertaken in heaven without an overwhelming sustaining vote.

the failure of all participants in the plan is a possible outcome

So it sounds like you are saying it is a logical possibility. Which means I agree with your point.

I made my comment based on what I see as a continued good faith effort on the part of Satan to thwart everything God is doing, and I believe he thinks he can win. When dealing with free agents, the failure of all participants in the plan is a possible outcome. I think the flood is a good example of this. The flood represents a hard reset, a “let’s start this over again”.

Ultimately God will not fail because he always has the hard reset as an option.

For all that JNS has been frustrated with folks on this blog for not giving compatibilism a fair shake, he has not yet told us where to find the treatment of compatibilism that we are neglecting. So, I am with you.

i.e. people become compatibilists because they do not like the idea of events without antecedent causes, and subsequently lose the ability to identify an original or primary cause for anything. Classical theists aside, in the philosophical sense, compatibilism is essentially the denial of causes.

AB

J Nelson-Seawright and Adam Greenwood formed an unlikely alliance to defend compatibilism for Mormons in this thread. Clark less vigorously chimed in at the follow up thread here. And here is a post where I stand all amazed at the number of Mormons who kinda sorta like compatibilism (Jeff G does most of the compatibilism defending there with Christian Cardall assisting to some degree).

Of course I think all the Mormon compatibilism defenders fail in the end but at least they give it the ol’ college try…

Aaron B

If God knows all things in futurity, why can’t he help the prophet be more specific? D&C 87 has nothing in it that requires twisting of words. The major nations in Joseph’s day are still around today. The Civil War started in South Carolina: a specific. England would be asked by the South to assist them: a specific. England would ask other nations to help them when war falls on all nations: a specific.
Slave would rise up against their masters marshaled in the disciplines of war: a non-specific. Wouldn’t it have been easier to say, that Russia and other slave nations would be overthrown by their slaves?
The remaining slaves would become angry and vex the Gentile nations: a non-specific. Wouldn’t it have been easier to say the Muslims would attack the West?

God caused Adam and Eve to fall, btw. He gave them time in the Garden to choose for themselves between having children (a commandment they were ignoring) or not eating of the tree of knowledge. Only when God allowed the serpent to test them did they fall – and there are differing statements on whether Adam and Eve were smart or just dupes.

Patriarchal blessings can be very generic. While I believe them to be inspired, I see them sometimes as being as generic as the astrology chart in the newspaper. God anticipates what he wants done, but does not necessarily foresee it. He can give specific direction in a blessing, and then work to have it accomplished. But there are many blessings given that do not come to pass exactly as they state, and we end up trying to find the mystery meaning. My patriarchal blessing is a great guide to me. It has helped make me what I am today. But I do not know whether that’s because it predicted my future, or whether I followed its guidance, which now reflects my present.

Once again, God is a grand chess master. He can highly predict the moves up close, but they get more open the further he goes down. As he needs to step in and massage the results, he does, to ensure his overarching plan is accomplished.

In this way, he can give commandments and promises to people in the scriptures, and then when they disobey, he revokes them. This happened with Thomas Marsh and David W. Patten, who were to go England on missions, but didn’t. Why not? Because their agency went a different direction.