A Civil Discussion about the Origin of Sin

This is where the mystery is. We know that God is the Author. We know that God either causes or ordains all things. We know that He is not the cause of sin.

They mystery is that all these biblical facts (which are facts and not opinions) exist in a non-contradictory way.

So, like the physicist who understands why a 747 flies and yet marvels at the "law" of physics, we marvel at God--His sovereignty, His power, and His mystery--all the while understanding His "law" of Himself.

The Archangel

 

One easy way to think about the issue of sin is to say that God will never implicate Himself in causing sin or being sinful. He will allow (permissive will) those creatures who are already predisposed to sin to do what it is that they will do according to their nature. This is fairly clearly spelled out in Romans 1, where the implication is that those who sin are allowed to sin all the more. The damnation is on them, not on God.

Of note (critical!) to say that God is the author of sin, or that God has sinned is heretical and blasphemy. I cannot even fathom the idea, even to play "devil's advocate" in debate. This one issue would violate our Lord and King at the highest and deepest level possible, and perhaps step over into the bounds of the unpardonable sin. That so many can so easily toss about their point of view that this or that makes God the author of sin is incomprehensible to me. Does no man fear Holy and Almighty God?

 

That is not what the Bible teaches. It does not say that God ALLOWED the Assyrians. It simply does not.

He BROUGHT the Assyrians upon Israel.

The Bible does not say that he ALLOWED men to crucify Christ. It simply does not say that. You literally have to ABUSE the Words of God and CHANGE them to support this doctrine.

The Word of God says that they did "whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel DETERMINED before to do."

I cannot debate this issue with anyone who is allowed to make the Bible say whatever they want. Words have meaning and the Word of God is very clear on these matters.

 

Satan is in the mix. But, he is not the "cause." Again, the very words of Job attribute the affliction to God, not Satan. Though we are given the "behind the scenes" look at the beginning of the book, by the time we get to the end of the book, there is no doubt that God is the Afflictor of Job. Job asks God "Why?" and God never gives him an answer. But, God does give Job a far greater glimpse of His power and glory in ch 38-42.

If we were to accept Satan as the ultimate cause of Job's affliction, the reader would expect Job to be having the ch. 38-42 interaction with Satan, not God. It is extremely instructive that God never gives Job the answer to "why." It is not because God doesn't know the answer. The answer is, basically, "I'm God and you are not."

Now I know that answer does hit some people the wrong way. But it is not, then, a philosophical problem at this point. It is a problem of faith.

The Archangel

 

Once again, the Word of God is clear. It was the LORD who took away. God's word says of Job's testimony that in saying THOSE VERY WORDS Job did not charge God foolishly.

Job was absolutely right in his claim that God afflicted him.

The word "allow" and the IDEA of allowance is not in the text ANYWHERE.

Job recognized before the Bible was written a truth that is everywhere affirmed in the Word of God:

Lam 3:37-38 Who has spoken and it came to pass, unless the Lord has commanded it? Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and bad come?

 

It is my joy to discuss theological issues. My frustration is made manifest when people make it personal and detract from the subject.

Agreed.

Almost agreed. Allowing is a concept that is foreign to the passage concerning the crucifixion of Christ, the affliction of Job, the heinous treatment of Joseph and others.

The Scripture is clear. God is DOING these things. But God is not evil in doing them because his motive is pure and right. His is an ultimate motive which will produce an ultimate and eternal good. Those individuals with evil motives who God is using have immediate motives.

The two work asymmetrically but are not morally equivalent by any means.

I agree. But the Bible is clear that God does not just allow these things but that he does indeed decree them.

Evil is the absence of good just as darkness is the absence of light. God willed for evil to be and brought it to pass in a passive manner by simply removing his goodness from that space for that time.

I cannot improve upon Edwards' words on this matter:

and...

I am not against ethos and pathos, but it must be tempered by logos.

No, but it is a pivotal matter in this discussion.

If God willed the most heinous crime of all time; if he decreed it; if he determined it, then any argument that he would not ever decree heinous sins is moot.

I doubt that it is in the exact same manner. The point is that God did decree that evil come to pass. Do you deny that?

 

But, once again the Word of God is clear. God DID this to Job. Job said so and his testimony was right because Scripture says, "In all this Job... did not charge God foolishly".

 

Guarantee you, when God asked Satan, "Hast thou considered my servant Job?", Satan had already had an eye on Job.

 

I want to make this post personal.

If I have an evil thought, did it come from God or did it come from me?

 

Once again I refer you to Edwards:

Is God the Author of Sin?

 

Ordains means, strictly, that God does allow or permit evil. But it goes further than that too. It means that His purposes are served through evil and that nothing--not even the murderous regimes of Hitler or Stalin--are accidental or out of control.

It means, as someone else has said, "there are no rogue atoms in all the universe."

Ordains means that, in some way and without sinning, God can and does use evil things, evil persons, etc. to accomplish His purposes for His world.

I have to say that your statement "No where [sic.] in scripture do we have conclusive evidence that God has "caused" or "determined" all things" is shockingly and staggeringly surprising. I can only take this statement to mean that you do not believe God to be sovereign over all things. Your statement suggests that there are things which God does not control. This is a shocking admission from you.

Paul clearly states "from him and through him and to him are all things." Jesus says "All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father." John says "The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand." Paul, again, says "In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will"

The pagan king Nebuchadnezzar says of God:

...his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
and his kingdom endures from generation to generation;
35 all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
and he does according to his will among the host of heaven
and among the inhabitants of the earth;
and none can stay his hand
or say to him, “What have you done?”
​

God Himself declares:

8 “Remember this and stand firm,
recall it to mind, you transgressors,
9 remember the former things of old;
for I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me,
10 declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done,
saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
and I will accomplish all my purpose,’
11 calling a bird of prey from the east,
the man of my counsel from a far country.
I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass;
I have purposed, and I will do it.
​

So, your statement, while shocking, is totally and utterly false. And, your statement reveals much about what you think of God.

Now, as to the second part of the question, I do not adopt a deterministic theology. Determinism, classically speaking, is suggesting impersonal forces are determining everything--mother nature and such. That is not how the absolute sovereignty of God is portrayed in the Bible. The reason--perhaps the only reason--that the "determinism" (using your words) of Calvinism is not based on an impersonal mechanism or force. It is based on a holy and loving God who knows more than us and who actively works all things together for our good and His glory.

There is a pastor-acquaintance on Twitter who said "I am gratefully bound to the free will of God." This pretty much sums up the reformed position.

We do not see God as an impersonal, deterministic force, as you would suggest. We see Him as a holy and loving father that is always looking out for our good--even by bringing evil into our life to glorify Himself by revealing Himself more deeply to us through our suffering.

So, why don't I adopt your theology in this area? Because it is patently unbiblical.

The Archangel

 

The though "I will ascend into heaven" was both original to Satan and ordained by God.

It is not either or. It is both/and. Yes this is a paradox. But, as are so many things in the Bible, there is more than just one level going on here.

The Archangel

 

So Luke, do you share the sentiment of Sprould Jr. that "wrath" is a necessary attribute of God, and thus He NEEDED to create sinners in order to have and object of that attribute?

 

I should like to see that quote from Sproul jr. in it's context, so I do not know.

But as it sounds on the surface here as you present it, no. Neither wrath nor grace are eternal in the sense that throughout eternity past there were no creatures to be gracious to and no creatures to bestow wrath upon.

But love and holiness ARE eternal attributes of God. And if they are to be DISPLAYED to the fullest extent then wrath and grace must come to pass.

Yet again I cannot improve upon the words of Edwards on this matter. Please read them contemplatively:

 

Amy,

If it is God, then I alone am keeping him quite busy.