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
A Civil Discussion about the Origin of Sin
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Skandelon, Feb 2, 2011.
Page 5 of 9
-
The Archangel Well-Known Member
-
BUT, just consider the one phrase you presented: "We know that God either causes or ordains all things."
What exactly does that mean? Because if you mean by "ordains" that God allows or permits evil, then we have no disagreement...and since you didn't just simply say, "God causes all things" I think you recognize the difficulty of such a position.
No where in scripture do we have conclusive evidence that God has "caused" or "determined" all things. We also know, as you pointed out, that God doesn't cause sin, or even tempt men to evil. So, why adopt a deterministic theology by which God is casually determining even the thought of such things as the rape and murder of a child? Why not do as you have already done and simply appeal to mystery with regard to the self-determined choices of sinful man and leave it at that?
Do you understand my question? -
You seem to blur that line so much that it leaves no real distinction and thus does injustice to the text which took such pains to present Satan in the mix for that very reason. -
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? -
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. -
The Archangel Well-Known Member
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 -
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? -
-
Again, considering the OP and your argument here; are you attempting to argue that God's role in the affliction of Job (to whatever degree that may be), is equal to God's originating the thought of a child molester?
I ask, because instead of answering the question directly you have diverted the question to discuss the crucifixion and now Job. So, are you attempting to argue that God originated the thought of the first child molester and using the cases of God's involvement in the crucifixion and his involvement in Job to support your answer?
Again, I'm just attempting to understand your view (see my last post directed toward you). -
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 cannot improve upon Edwards' words on this matter:
and...
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.
-
When Satan said in his mind "I will ascend to heaven," was that thought original to Satan or did God originate it? As the OP asks, how do you defend either of those possibilities? -
-
Guarantee you, when God asked Satan, "Hast thou considered my servant Job?", Satan had already had an eye on Job.
-
If I have an evil thought, did it come from God or did it come from me? -
Is God the Author of Sin?
-
The Archangel Well-Known Member
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.
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 Archangel Well-Known Member
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 -
-
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:
-
If it is God, then I alone am keeping him quite busy. :)
Page 5 of 9