Featured Compatibilism: Is God the Author of Sin?

By the way, compatabilism departs from determinalism in what it affirms, not what it denies (the argument against compatiblism is identical to the argument against determinalism .... And the argument against compatiblism is identical to the argument against free-will salvation).

 

When Joseph was sold into bondage, was it the will of Joseph's brothers or the will of God?

As a compatabilist, I believe that God planned this event to make Israel the nation it would at the Exodus. But I also believe that the brothers acted freely when they betrayed Joseph.

Determinalism would hold the brothers had no choice. Free-Will theology would deny God's active providence in the event occurring. But Scripture presents the event as both God's plan and the brother's sin.

The "logical conclusion" of determinism is a fatalistic application of doctrine. The "logical conclusion" of a Free-will theology that denies Divine Providence is Open Theism. Compatabilism doesn't seek a middle ground but a biblical ground.

 

I believe Calvin correct here. Scripture tells us that man plans his way, makes his decisions, and conceives his plans. Sin comes from the heart of man. But at the same time (and for two of the three statements I made....in the same verse) Scripture says that the actual steps belong to God, that God owns the action.

Now let's look at Calvin's statement. Calvin says that nothing happens apart from God's command. Calvin draws home the notion with the imagery of God holding the bridle, restraining evil so that in effect all things work for the good. Even the plans of men are tempered by the restraining hand of God in such a way what comes to pass does so by God's decree. But notice, no one is saying here (except, perhaps, you and a couple others) that God causes sin.

I do not understand why the imagery escapes you. When we harness the power of a river to produce electricity, we are not producing water but rather controlling what is already there to serve our purpose. Likewise this imagery of God is restraining - the wicked conceive mischief, plan what they have conceived, execute their plans, but only insofar as God permits, only as God commands. Even the Fall, the great example of human sin, will prove to work out for the good - for God's purposes.

 

The statement by Calvin says that man cannot cause any "mischief" unless He commands it. There's the imagery of the bridle restraining sin and then Calvin doubles down on it and says it can happen only if God commands it. His statement is not a hard thing to comprehend.[/QUOTE]
I have disagreed with you on occasion, brother, but have always considered you to have a sense of integrity about you. So let’s look at this with a bit of this sense about us. I do not think it is as hard to understand as you may seem to think, but regardless, I think that you will at least be able to say (even if you disagree with Calvin’s doctrine) that Calvin does not mean God is the cause of evil in the quote you provide.

But first, you are wrong on one point at the start (one that would appear to be in your favor). Calvin does not say that men cannot cause mischief apart from God’s command. He says that men cannot even conceive of mischief except so far as God permits, and even commands. What is the context? God restraining, bridling the wickedness of men for his own purposes. God commands the minds of men. So what is the context?

I see two possibilities. Either Calvin is saying God not only commands but is the cause of sin, or Calvin is saying that God commands a sin that originates with men. How do we find out what Calvin meant in this short paragraph? Perhaps we should let Calvin explain:

Calvin says that nothing happens, even sin, apart from God’s decree (God’s command, and God’s plan). But he also states that the “proper and genuine cause of sin is not God’s hidden counsel but the evident will of man”. While Calvin states that Adam’s Fall was “not without God’s knowledge and ordination” he also says “see that you make not God the author sin, by charging his sacred decree with men’s miscarriages, as if that were the cause or occasion of them, which we are sure that it is not, nor can be, any more than the sun can be the cause of darkness.”

So given that Calvin says that the “cause of sin is not God’s hidden counsel” and instead attributes the cause of sin to be “the evident will of man”, and that Calvin teaches to be careful that we “make not God the author of sin”, and that God can no more be the cause of sin than “the sun can be the cause of darkness”….are you honestly stating that you believe Calvin, in the exact same document, is also claiming that God authored sin?

You are an intelligent man. What is in question, then, is your integrity in dealing with the topic – NOT that I am calling your integrity into question, but that you are making a statement that may be doing exactly that. I understand why you would question Calvin’s logic, interpretations, reasoning, etc. But I do not understand why you (who seemed so insistent on integrity in politics) could honestly claim that Calvin is saying God authored sin when he in fact says the opposite. If you were to insist on such a thing, how are you any different from those who engage in propaganda to forward their political views? Is that really the stance you want to take?

 

You quoted my statement that God's decision not to save all is beyond my responsibility and responded by presenting Calvinists as having no concern for the lost. You seemed to withdraw only when you realized I was referring to Scripture.

 

Ok…Great – we’ve moved from the idea that we do not really believe what we say we believe to “let’s debate what you believe”. I’m willing to do that, as long as we keep it honest.

I agree that definitions are a large part of our disagreement. Even then, we will disagree because of our reasoning, and perhaps interpretation.

When I say that we have “free-will” I mean that we have the freedom to choose. If given the choice between A or B, it is up to me to choose A or B. I am not programmed, the decision is not God’s to make, God does not override my will, and I freely choose. I believe in the “human free agency” of men. This is implied when we are found “guilty”. No choice, no guilt. But men do have a choice. And men have a legitimate choice. And men choose.

If I tied someone up and told them they can't eat unless they press a button and they, unaware that the button would kill people, pressed the button for food, would I accuse them of murder? I wouldn't, no. At the same time I realize that Scripture says that we commit sins of which we are unaware....so I'm not 100% on that answer. It is not that the dude lacked free will, but he lacked knowledge. He did not know the consequences of his actions, or perhaps he would have refrained from pushing the button and opted instead to die of hunger. Insofar as the topic, though, Paul addresses this when he says that all have sinned and are guilty because all have rejected what they have known of God, which has been revealed through the testimony of Creation.

Here's a better illustration - I am guilty of murdering the king's son, but I am not alone. A group of us chose to commit the crime. I stand on trial and see the king pardon my nephew who helped me. But he doesn't pardon me. Am I guilty or innocent? I don't know why the king pardoned my nephew, but was he obligated to pardon me as well? Does the king's decision not to pardon me for a crime that I committed make him unjust?

 

Romans 9:19-24 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.