Origin of Sin, Part Deux

[Skandelon]

No, of course not.

Did you miss where I responded to your post and showed how you are STILL dealing with only one part of what he is saying in that very quote?

I've dealt with the "disposing events" portion of the quote several times. The first time I asked you define what you mean by "dispose," to which you never provided a definition, but I affirmed what Edwards said and even his intent, which I know is consistent with historical Arminianism, because the quote itself said so.

So, which part of the quote have I not acknowledged, affirmed or dealt with?

 

[Skandelon]

Edward's said "disposer of the state of events", not just permitting events leading up to the event.
If God is "disposing" the state of events, then He is doing more than just simple foreknowledge.

If God determined every desire, event, act in the way you appear to be arguing, and you think that is what Edwards meant then why would he even mention God permitting evil? Why even mention God's permitting of something that he really determined?

Truth is, that his position is consistent with historical Arminian scholars as the quote itself proves and I assure you that Arminians NEVER supported the idea that God caused/determined or originated evil.

I'm fine with the word "dispose" in the context of God permissive will. It means "to arrange; to put in order." And the idea that God is "the permitter, or not a hinderer of sin; and, at the same time, [arranges] the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy, and most excellent ends and purposes, that sin, if it be permitted or not hindered, will most certainly and infallibly follow."

Edwards mentions the "permission" or the "not hindering of sin" four times in this one quote. Now, explain to me. If by this Edwards believed God in any way created/originated/authored/determined/caused sin why in the world would he even mention his permitting or not hindering it? That would be like me taking a gun shooting my dog and then saying I permitted the dog to be shot and I didn't hinder the bullet from hitting him. Why not just say, "I shot the dog," if that is what I really believe? I the same manner if Edwards really believed God originated sin in any way, why not just say so and lose this idea of "permitting" and "not hindering" it?

It seems to me, this is the very epitome of "antecedent condition" and "causal law" in determining that sin will take place.
Not necessarily the "sinning" (ie.the actions), but everything that made the whole event/sin (ie. the act) possible.

Possible. Yes, you got it!

Let me illustrate:
An atheist would say "What an unloving, impotent, and terrible God you claim. For if He knew about this heinous act, even knew beforehand Dahmer's thoughts. Why did your weak god not stop him"?

Also the statement, "Dahmer's thought made God know it and He permitted it and all the events leading up to it to exist" raises another question.

How is this any less egregious as to the character of God?

You don't see the difference in God originating the very intent of Dahmer's sin and his mere allowing sin to temporarily have reign in a fallen world?

Did God say, here is a situation Dahmer has "made" me know, I will now foresee if I can work this to My grand plan?
Did God foresee two people that would choose to have Dahmer?
Did God foresee the one who provided the wicked material that sparked Dahmer?
Did God foresee the lives of Dahmer's victims?
Did God foresee and then just simply permit all these things, by happenstance, to connect?
If their connection was not "happenstance" then what caused the connection

Ask Edwards. I like the way explained it. Plus, you're question presumes a deterministic answer is required which is really begging the question.

I don't pretend to fully understand the inner workings of a infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient supreme being in the relation to finite created world. I only know that he is perfect and holy. He doesn't even tempt men to sin. And I'd much rather think of God as merely permitting these things than the alternative of God being the origin of sin.

Your scenario reduces God to being ever at the disposal of man's "free will"

You accuse us of limiting or reducing God, but we are not the ones who are saying that God couldn't handle a world where he is not in complete deterministic control of every thought or action. We are not the ones who say God MUST play both sides of the chess board to ensure victory.

Our scenario only "reduces" God if you presume your deterministic view of God is somehow better, which again begs the question.

Is this the same reason you will not affirm as Edward's did that "God is the author of sin"?

Did you do what I asked you to do and read the quote in its entirety so you don't keep embarrassing yourself? Here let me help you by reposting his first paragraph:

“They who object, that this doctrine makes God the author of sin, ought distinctly to explain what they mean by that phrase, ‘the author of sin.’ I know the phrase, as it is commonly used, signifies something very ill. If by ‘the author of sin,’ be meant ‘the sinner, the agent,’ or ‘actor of sin,’ or ‘the doer of a wicked thing’; so it would be a reproach and blasphemy, to suppose God to be the author of sin. In this sense, I utterly deny God to be the author of sin."

 

[Luke2427]

I've dealt with the "disposing events" portion of the quote several times. The first time I asked you define what you mean by "dispose," to which you never provided a definition, but I affirmed what Edwards said and even his intent, which I know is consistent with historical Arminianism, because the quote itself said so.

So, which part of the quote have I not acknowledged, affirmed or dealt with?

It is not that you have not acknowledged it. It is that you have not expressed that you understand it. What it seems you are missing is that the portion of the quote which states that God is the disposer of events in such a manner that if permitted sin will most certainly follow clearly purports that God intended and ordered events so that sin would come to pass according to his will.

That is the clear meaning. God is NOT JUST the permitter of sin. He is the One who orders events SO THAT sin will come to pass.

It seems to me that you are hung up on the "permitting" part of the quote which I already understood you to believe and on which I figure there is little difference betwixt us.

It is that part that clearly indicates that God planned, intended and ordered event for evil to come to pass that you seem to not understand.

 

[glfredrick]

I hate to play the part of the "Hebrew Police," but I will anyway.

Unfortunately, Strongs is very much inadequate to find the true nuance of the words you are posting. Strongs seems to have no discernment between the Hebrew stems--Qal, piel, hifil, pual, hofal, nifal, hitpael (which is to say Strongs doesn't tell you what occurrence of what word is in what stem).

With each stem the nuance is quite different in many cases.

Now, not meaning to be "ugly," you probably have no idea the difference between qal and nifal. That's just a hunch...I may be wrong.

In your post above, you base a large part of your idea on the word "found" being a qal. It isn't qal, it is nifal. Therefore, the translations out of Strongs that you chose are not correct. Now, it is possible to translate this word--מצא--as a passive of the qal (the passive meaning that the subject is acted upon). But, as a nifal, it could be understood (in the nuance) to be "overpowered," "apprehended," or "captured."

So, in essence, your assumptions about this word are not really so cut and dry.

This is one of the dangers, especially in Hebrew, of using Strongs when one has no training in Hebrew.

So, I'm not writing this to offend you or to "slam dunk" you (after all, I think the nifal of מצא is best translated "was found"). This is meant as a word of caution that you might not be accurate if you are only trusting in Strongs without knowing that there are different stems and what those different stems mean. Using Strongs to discern Hebrew without training in Hebrew is like a four-year-old trying to drive a race car during the Daytona 500.

Blessings,

The Archangel

Great response. I was going to keep it more simple. One does not just take the entire list of potential usages of any particular word, whether Hebrew, English, or Greek, and then pick and chose, cafeteria-style, from that list to define as needed to support any given outcome.

A tad more exegetical work is required first.

 

[Skandelon]

It is not that you have not acknowledged it. It is that you have not expressed that you understand it.

So why didn't you say that? You have accused me of "not acknowledge it" and "totally excluding it." If it is a matter of misunderstanding then wouldn't my request for you to DEFINE the word "DISPOSE" be reasonable? I believe I know what Edwards meant because the quote itself claims to line up with historical Arminian views. It's your understanding that is in question.

What it seems you are missing is that the portion of the quote which states that God is the disposer of events in such a manner that if permitted sin will most certainly follow clearly purports that God intended and ordered events so that sin would come to pass according to his will.

This doesn't remove the problem or answer the question we have been asking. I have affirmed this. God's disposing, arranging or ordering of events so as to ensure other things follow doesn't answer the question as to the origin of the intent to sin. Follow me on this.

Let's suppose Dahmer's dad beat him which was one of the "events" disposed by God. Does that mean that God originated the thought or intent of Mr. Dahmer to beat his kid? No, it means, as Edwards said, God permitted, or did not hinder it so that Dahmer's intent to molest and kill would most certainly come to pass. Again, you still have Dahmer originating the intent to sin just as you have his dad originating his own intent to sin. Calling God the disposer of events doesn't make him any more the originator of the sinful intent, it simply affirms the idea that he foreknew the sinful events an permitted them to certainly occur. How is that any more or less deterministic than what I have already affirmed about Edwards quote?

That is the clear meaning. God is NOT JUST the permitter of sin. He is the One who orders events SO THAT sin will come to pass.

Does "order" mean "cause/create/originate" because if so then the event where Dahmer's dad intended to beat his son was originated by God rather than permitted by God, as Edwards explains with regard to sinful acts. Which is it?

It seems to me that you are hung up on the "permitting" part of the quote which I already understood you to believe and on which I figure there is little difference betwixt us.

My question is why even mention what God permits in a world where everything is determined by God?

Can you distinguish between that which God has originated and that which he has permitted? Please explain.

 

[Amy.G]

That is the clear meaning. God is NOT JUST the permitter of sin. He is the One who orders events SO THAT sin will come to pass.

Clearly you believe that God is the author of sin. How can you charge God with sin? Have you no fear of Him?


Jesus said:
"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.


Yet you tell us that God Himself causes us to sin!!


To me, this is blasphemy.

 

[Luke2427]

If God determined every desire, event, act in the way you appear to be arguing, and you think that is what Edwards meant then why would he even mention God permitting evil? Why even mention God's permitting of something that he really determined?

I do not understand why this is problematic for you.

God must do several things for anything to come to pass.
1. He must permit it.
2. He must enable or empower it.
3. He must ordain or decree it. (God has to know it is to come to pass before he orders the events that will lead to it coming to pass. By the ordering of those events he ordains it.)

I have determined that my Son will play a while when he gets home today from school BEFORE he does his homework. I also will permit it.

In order for it to happen I have determined it beforehand and will permit it when the time comes.

Truth is, that his position is consistent with historical Arminian scholars as the quote itself proves and I assure you that Arminians NEVER supported the idea that God caused/determined or originated evil.

Which is a weaker way of saying that many Arminians agree with Calvinism on this point. Arminianism came late to the party. Calvinism doesn't agree with Arminianism on anything. Arminianism agrees with Calvinism on some things.
It would be, imo, a nobler and more honest way of saying this than indicating that Edwards agrees with Arminians- though it is true, and though he may have said ti that way, we all know what he meant and we all know that Calvinism was here first.

I'm fine with the word "dispose" in the context of God permissive will. It means "to arrange; to put in order." And the idea that God is "the permitter, or not a hinderer of sin; and, at the same time, [arranges] the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy, and most excellent ends and purposes, that sin, if it be permitted or not hindered, will most certainly and infallibly follow."

Excellent. Then we have an accord. You agree that God ordered the universe in part so that evil will come to pass to serve his holy purposes.

I do not know why we are debating. You are a Calvinist.

Edwards mentions the "permission" or the "not hindering of sin" four times in this one quote. Now, explain to me. If by this Edwards believed God in any way created/originated/authored/determined/caused sin why in the world would he even mention his permitting or not hindering it?

Please explain to me why you do not understand this. Why can you not seem to understand that if ANYTHING is to occur that God has decreed he must ALSO permit it when the time comes for it to come to pass?

That would be like me taking a gun shooting my dog and then saying I permitted the dog to be shot and I didn't hinder the bullet from hitting him.

No. It is nothing like that at all. That is a false analogy.

Why not just say, "I shot the dog," if that is what I really believe? I the same manner if Edwards really believed God originated sin in any way, why not just say so and lose this idea of "permitting" and "not hindering" it?

He did say so. We cannot understand why you cannot see this.

You don't see the difference in God originating the very intent of Dahmer's sin and his mere allowing sin to temporarily have reign in a fallen world?

The crucifixion of the Son of God is a far worse sin and the thought originated in eternity past in the secret council halls of the infinite and holy wisdom of God.
Since there is nothing that ever happens apart from God's ordering of events so that it will come to pass, and since we understand the Word of God teaches that the worst sin ever committed was determined in eternity past by God- it should be no problem for you to see that God has determined all things including those far lesser evils committed by Dahmer.

Furthermore, the Word of God is clear:
"For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things." Romans 11:36

I don't pretend to fully understand the inner workings of a infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient supreme being in the relation to finite created world. I only know that he is perfect and holy. He doesn't even tempt men to sin. And I'd much rather think of God as merely permitting these things than the alternative of God being the origin of sin.

Scripture doesn't allow for the idea that God is not fully in control of all things and that he does not have a definite purpose for everything that ever comes to pass by his power.

The greater mystery is how man can have his own motive and be responsible for his evil and God can still be fully Sovereign and have none of his purposes thwarted at all and will that man does what he does.
That is a mystery- but I am not willing to deny the Word of God just because I cannot fully explain it.

It is enough for me that God has holy purposes for all things that he wills. And it is not hard for me to see this when I understand the great glory the Lamb will receive forever for dying for our sin. Evil has MOST ASSUREDLY served a magnificent purpose here. So it is VERY easy for me to see that he has a purpose for it everywhere. I trust his WORD.

Proverbs 16:4 The LORD hath made all [things] for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

33The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.

Deut 32:39 See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Did Pilate kill Christ? Yes. Did Herod? Yes. Did the Roman soldiers? Yes. Did God? Yes.

God kills and God makes alive. Did Dahmer kill those people? Yes. Did God kill them? God's own testimony: "I kill and I make alive."

Did you do what I asked you to do and read the quote in its entirety so you don't keep embarrassing yourself? Here let me help you by reposting his first paragraph:

This is uncalled for. We are trying to have a civil conversation. And he has said nothing of which he ought to be embarrassed. If he had you would have been nobler not to say so.

 

[quantumfaith]

It is not that you have not acknowledged it. It is that you have not expressed that you understand it. What it seems you are missing is that the portion of the quote which states that God is the disposer of events in such a manner that if permitted sin will most certainly follow clearly purports that God intended and ordered events so that sin would come to pass according to his will.

That is the clear meaning. God is NOT JUST the permitter of sin. He is the One who orders events SO THAT sin will come to pass.

It seems to me that you are hung up on the "permitting" part of the quote which I already understood you to believe and on which I figure there is little difference betwixt us.

It is that part that clearly indicates that God planned, intended and ordered event for evil to come to pass that you seem to not understand.

I just think you are wrong here Luke, can I argue convincingly...most likely not, but I just think you are wrong here.

 

[Luke2427]

Clearly you believe that God is the author of sin. How can you charge God with sin? Have you no fear of Him?


Jesus said:
"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.


Yet you tell us that God Himself causes us to sin!!


To me, this is blasphemy.

That is because you do not understand.

 

[Amy.G]

That is because you do not understand.

Understand what? You make God the author of sin. I understand it perfectly well. You've said it many times. I don't think you understand what you're saying. At least I hope you're doing it in ignorance and not purposely.

 

[Luke2427]

Understand what? You make God the author of sin. I understand it perfectly well. You've said it many times. I don't think you understand what you're saying. At least I hope you're doing it in ignorance and not purposely.

No. This is a matter of tremendous complexity.

You do not understand why God can will and ordain that evil come to pass and not be the author of sin.

And you do not understand that God can will for evil things to exist temporarily and have as his motive for those things the highest and holiest of purposes.

The crucifixion of Christ, the worlds greatest evil, is case in point.

The Bible is clear on this.

But it goes against what you like to feel. So, I am afraid, and truly not trying to be insulting here all the while knowing you are determined to take it that way, that you are more interested in how these things make you feel than what the Word of God clearly teaches right now.

 

[quantumfaith]

No. This is a matter of tremendous complexity.

You do not understand why God can will and ordain that evil come to pass and not be the author of sin.

And you do not understand that God can will for evil things to exist temporarily and have as his motive for those things the highest and holiest of purposes.

The crucifixion of Christ, the worlds greatest evil, is case in point.

The Bible is clear on this.

But it goes against what you like to feel. So, I am afraid, and truly not trying to be insulting here all the while knowing you are determined to take it that way, that you are more interested in how these things make you feel than what the Word of God clearly teaches right now.

Now Luke, I say this respectfully. It is NOT that WE do not understand. It is not just "something we feel". It is that we do not "view" God through the same lens as do you. Millions of people are convinced that God did not "ordain", or create evil etc. Numbers, I realize, does not make it correct, but your statements and interpretations also do not make them correct either. Just respect please, others feel differently than do you.

 

[Amy.G]

So, I am afraid, and truly not trying to be insulting here all the while knowing you are determined to take it that way, that you are more interested in how these things make you feel than what the Word of God clearly teaches right now.

"I am truly not trying to be insulting here" but that is just stupid.

Jesus said that causing someone to sin IS a sin. When you say that God causes us to sin then you have accused God of being a sinner. That is not my "feeling", that is a FACT.

 

[Luke2427]

"I am truly not trying to be insulting here" but that is just stupid.

Jesus said that causing someone to sin IS a sin. When you say that God causes us to sin then you have accused God of being a sinner. That is not my "feeling", that is a FACT.

As I said, you do not understand.

Man sins because he wants to sin.

God ordained everything that man ever does, indeed, everything that ever happens.

The Bible is clear.

"Men mean it for evil but God means it for good."

There is nothing clearer in the Word of God.

 

[Luke2427]

Now Luke, I say this respectfully. It is NOT that WE do not understand. It is not just "something we feel". It is that we do not "view" God through the same lens as do you. Millions of people are convinced that God did not "ordain", or create evil etc. Numbers, I realize, does not make it correct, but your statements and interpretations also do not make them correct either. Just respect please, others feel differently than do you.

Brother Quantum, you obviously cannot see this from my perspective but when the Word of God says extraordinarily clearly

Gen 18:14 Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son.”

Ex 4:11 Then the Lord said to him, “Who has made man’s mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?

Eccl 7:13-14 Consider the work of God: who can make straight what He has made crooked? In the day of prosperity be joyful, and in the day of adversity consider: God has made the one as well as the other, so that man may not find out anything that will be after him.

Jer 32:27 “Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh. Is anything too hard for me?

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?

Amos 3:6 Is a trumpet blown in a city, and the people are not afraid? Does disaster come to a city, unless the Lord has done it?

Rom 9:19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who can resist His will?”


Exod 4:11 Then the Lord said to him, “Who has made man’s mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?

Deut 32:39 See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

2 Chr 20:6 and said, “O Lord, God of our fathers, are you not God in heaven? You rule over all the kingdoms of the nations. In your hand are power and might, so that none is able to withstand You.

Ps 103:19 The Lord has established His throne in the heavens, and His kingdom rules over all.

Ps 115:3 Our God is in the heavens; He does all that He pleases.

Ps 135:6 Whatever the Lord pleases, He does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps.

Isa 45:5-7 I am the Lord, and there is no other, besides Me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me, that people may know, from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none besides Me; I am the Lord, and there is no other. I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things.

Isa 46:10 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,’

Dan 4:35 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?”

Luke 1:37 For nothing will be impossible with God.

Acts 4:27-28 For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your plan had predestined to take place.

Acts 17:26 And He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place

Rev 17:17 For God has put it into their hearts to carry out His purpose by being of one mind and handing over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled.

and you simply say, "I cannot argue convincingly but I just do not agree"... well, I can't help but think it is an emotional hang up.

 

[Amy.G]

As I said, you do not understand.

Man sins because he wants to sin.

God ordained everything that man ever does, indeed, everything that ever happens.

The Bible is clear.

"Men mean it for evil but God means it for good."

There is nothing clearer in the Word of God.

Yes man sins because he chooses to. God uses man's choices for His own purposes. That is a far cry from God committing sin. If God causes man to sin then He is a sinner according the words of Christ.

Your beliefs are sick and scary.

 

[Luke2427]

Yes man sins because he chooses to. God uses man's choices for His own purposes. That is a far cry from God committing sin. If God causes man to sin then He is a sinner according the words of Christ.

Your beliefs are sick and scary.

Nobody said God commits sin.

God ordered the events of the world so that sin will most certainly come to pass. Man is still doing what he wants to do. No one is forcing him to sin.

But what you continually ignore is this plain Bible FACT-

Men do it for evil but God does it for good.

 

[Amy.G]

Nobody said God commits sin.

Please reconcile your statment:

God is NOT JUST the permitter of sin. He is the One who orders events SO THAT sin will come to pass.

with Jesus' words:

But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

 

[Luke2427]

Please reconcile your statment:



with Jesus' words:

But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Yea, that verse has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

 

[Winman]

I have told this story before, but when my oldest son was maybe around two years old, he tried to reach up and touch a hot lightbulb. I yelled, Don't touch that, it is hot! He jerked his hand away. But then he got a sly little look on his face and reached up again to touch the lightbulb. Again, I yelled, Don't touch that! It is very hot and will burn you! Again, he jerked his hand away. But again, he got a sly little look on his face and reached up. It was obvious he was purposely defying me. So this time I said, Go ahead and touch it. He did, and instantly screamed and ran to his mother. He got a nice little blister on his finger and never tried to touch a lightbulb again.

Did I want him to touch the lightbulb and get burned? No. I really didn't. I hoped he would listen to me and learn without hurting himself. But after he repeatedly tried to touch the light I allowed him. Did I know it would burn him? Yes.

It was not my intention for my son to burn his finger. I really did not want that. But because he persisted in doing wrong I allowed him to do so. At this point, I would say it did become my intention, because I knew it would teach him a lesson.

So, I believe this is how God works as well. Did God want Joseph's brothers to throw him in a pit and sell him into slavery? No. But God could see they were determined to hurt him and used this for good. But the idea was Joseph's brothers, not God.

Just as I allowed my son to burn his finger for his own good. It was his idea to touch the light, not mine.