A Civil Discussion about the Origin of Sin

[Gabriel Elijah]

Evidently glf agrees with you; from the LFW thread:



How do we know that Satan's temptation of Eve was not HIS FIRST act of rebellion?

Very good question! And in short---we don’t! Even if we allow Isa 12 & Ezek 14 (or even Rev 12) to be about Satan’s rebellion (which many modern theologians do not by the way)—all we know is that Satan sinned by Gen 3. This very well could have been where he fell as well.

 

[slave 4 Christ]

This is an excellent question and like Luther told Erasmus, ""You [i.e., Erasmus] have not worried me with extraneous issues about the papacy, purgatory, indulgences, and such like, *trifles rather than issues ... you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and have aimed for the vital spot."

You said:
Luke,

Please allow me to cut to the heart of this matter...

Before a sin like murder, molestation, torture or some other heinous crime is committed there is a temptation or a thought that comes into the mind of the criminal, right?


1. If God, then you have to defend your position that God is not the author of evil.
2. If the criminal, then you have to defend your position that God "controls all things," because you have someone creating or originating something apart from God.

I noted you referred to temptation as one of the early stages of the origin of a sin. So let me begin by affirming that God indeed tempts no man to sin. He can neither be tempted with evil nor does he tempt any with evil.

This does not necessitate, however, that God will that evil not be.

Enter the Devil. He is a devil for sure, but he is God's devil. Job recognized this. It was most certainly Satan who afflicted Job, but Job said, "The LORD hath taken away." He also said, "Shall we receive good at the hand of the LORD and shall we not receive evil?"

Satan did it- but so did God. The affliction of Job was asymmetrical. But the deed was not morally equivalent. Satan did it for evil. God did it for good. The immediate result was bad. That was Satan's motive. The ultimate result was great good. That was God's motive.

So you asked, "Now, who is the first person who thought of the heinous sin of molesting and torturing a small child? Did God originate that thought or did it originate in the mind of a sinful criminal?"

Two things:

1. We must deal with the shock value of your question. It is filled with ethos that cannot go unchecked. I have never dealt with an Arminian who did not mention rape or child molestation in their defense of free will. It is meant to appeal to our sense of ethics. It is not logos because logos, or logic, says- if it is it is. It does not matter if we feel it is right or wrong. This kind of language you employ consists of ethos and pathos. Logos is used to get down to the bottom of a matter and see if it is true. The other two are meant to help win over hearts.

However...
The most heinous crime ever committed is not rape or child molestation as horrible as those things truly are. The most horrific sin ever committed was the torture and slaughter of the most innocent man who ever walked the earth; the brutal mutilation and murder of the only begotten Son of God.

And the Bible is clear about this sin which assuredly exceeds rape and child molestation in heinousness:

Acts 4:27-28 "For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done".

God determined before hand that this the worst crime ever committed should take place. If God willed that the worst sin of all time come to pass; if he ordained before the world began that the most atrocious crime of all time should be carried out- then the argument that some make that God would not will sin or evil is MOOT.

If he willed the worst sin then he certainly could be expected to will all lesser crimes.

But God willed that this, the greatest of all evils of all time should take place for the greatest of all goods of all time- his ultimate glory and our ultimate good.

The immediate motive was that of Herod and the others. That immediate motive was evil. But God also crucified Christ. His motive was not immediate. His motive was ultimate. And his motive was of the grandest and holiest of ends.

We will bask in the glory of the Lamb who died for us and praise him forever BECAUSE God willed the most horrible sin of all time to take place.

Without evil there is no Lamb dying for me. Without evil there is no grace, no mercy for me to experience to the fullest forever. And there is no eternal praise to God for infinite grace and mercy upon sinners like me.

2. You asked where the thought originated.
This same text tells us where the thought of the worst crime of all time originated.

For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, 28For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

The thought originated in eternity past in the secret council halls of the all wise, all perfect God.

But motive is the issue.

Yes Luke, motive is the issue.
All who read this, before your emotions get the better of you, consider Job.

Job 23:1-6

Job Replies: Where Is God?
1 Then Job answered and said:
2 "Today also my complaint is bitter;
my hand is heavy on account of my groaning.
3 Oh, that I knew where I might find him,
that I might come even to his seat!
4 I would lay my case before him
and fill my mouth with arguments.
5 I would know what he would answer me
and understand what he would say to me.
6 Would he contend with me in the greatness of his power?
No; he would pay attention to me.

Job is wanting to know, why.

God replies to Job in chapters 38-41.
If you want the truth read these chapters carefully, as GOD unfolds the truth of HIS absolute sovereignty.

If you have not read the above chapters, then Job's reply makes no sense.
But if you have, you will understand Job's heart.

Job’s Confession and Repentance

1 Then Job answered the LORD and said:
2 "I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
3 'Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?'Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand,
things too wonderful for me, which I did not know.
4 'Hear, and I will speak;
I will question you, and you make it known to me.'
5 I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear,
but now my eye sees you;
6 therefore I despise myself,
and repent in dust and ashes."
(Job 42:1-6 from ESV)

I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
This is the supreme hermeneutic for biblical interpretation.

Therefore, we must be content, that the "motive" of God is Sovereign and Pure.

 

[mets65]

In Genesis 3 he already reconized sin while he was tempting Eve. He must have fell before then.

 

[DHK]

Satan did it- but so did God. The affliction of Job was asymmetrical. But the deed was not morally equivalent. Satan did it for evil. God did it for good. The immediate result was bad. That was Satan's motive. The ultimate result was great good. That was God's motive.

You haven't read the passage clearly enough. God did not do it. He gave permission to Satan to afflict Job. Satan did it; not God. God only allowed it to happen. There is a big difference there. The permission was granted to Satan. You cannot attribute the evil back to God.

So you asked, "Now, who is the first person who thought of the heinous sin of molesting and torturing a small child? Did God originate that thought or did it originate in the mind of a sinful criminal?"

Two things:

1. We must deal with the shock value of your question. It is filled with ethos that cannot go unchecked. I have never dealt with an Arminian who did not mention rape or child molestation in their defense of free will. It is meant to appeal to our sense of ethics. It is not logos because logos, or logic, says- if it is it is. It does not matter if we feel it is right or wrong. This kind of language you employ consists of ethos and pathos. Logos is used to get down to the bottom of a matter and see if it is true. The other two are meant to help win over hearts.

However...
The most heinous crime ever committed is not rape or child molestation as horrible as those things truly are. The most horrific sin ever committed was the torture and slaughter of the most innocent man who ever walked the earth; the brutal mutilation and murder of the only begotten Son of God.

And the Bible is clear about this sin which assuredly exceeds rape and child molestation in heinousness:

Acts 4:27-28 "For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done".

God determined before hand that this the worst crime ever committed should take place. If God willed that the worst sin of all time come to pass; if he ordained before the world began that the most atrocious crime of all time should be carried out- then the argument that some make that God would not will sin or evil is MOOT.

If he willed the worst sin then he certainly could be expected to will all lesser crimes.

Your logic is flawed. The death of Christ was ordained before the foundation of the world. Many times did Christ tell his disciples that he would die and rise again. Time and time again it is prophesied in the Old Testament. That is not so with the rape and abortions that go on today. You do not take purpose into account in your reasoning. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ had eternal purpose--the forgiveness of sin to all who believe; the eternal damnation to all who reject Christ.

There is no purpose to those who commit acts of terrorism, murder, abortion, rape, etc. They are acts of the depravity of man's heart. No good comes from them. If you say that these acts were ordained from the foundation of the world on the same level as the death of Christ, what is the difference between your religion and that of Islam. There is no difference. Both are fatalistic.
Whatever God has willed, he has willed. Whatever happens is God's will. It is determined before hand. That is the fatalistic religion of Islam and it is exactly what you are expressing here. The Bible does not teach fatalism.

But God willed that this, the greatest of all evils of all time should take place for the greatest of all goods of all time- his ultimate glory and our ultimate good.

God's will was that Christ loved us enough to die for our sins.
God's will is not terrorism. It never was.

The immediate motive was that of Herod and the others. That immediate motive was evil. But God also crucified Christ. His motive was not immediate. His motive was ultimate. And his motive was of the grandest and holiest of ends.

Herod was wrong in what he did, and shall be judged for it. Christ went to the cross willingly. The Bible says: "I lay my life down, no man takes it from me." He could have called 12 legions of angels, but he didn't. He went willingly.

We will bask in the glory of the Lamb who died for us and praise him forever BECAUSE God willed the most horrible sin of all time to take place.

God the Father did not force God the Son to the cross. Christ prayed in the garden: "Father take this cup from me; nevertheless let thy will be done." His human nature did not want to go through with this. But in spite of that he willingly laid down his life for us. That is love.

Without evil there is no Lamb dying for me. Without evil there is no grace, no mercy for me to experience to the fullest forever. And there is no eternal praise to God for infinite grace and mercy upon sinners like me.

Without the love of the Savior there is no Lamb dying for you. He did it willingly out of love for you that you wouldn't have to pay the penalty of your own sins, a penalty that you could never pay. He loved you; that he died for you. You seem oblivious to the great love of God.

2. You asked where the thought originated.
This same text tells us where the thought of the worst crime of all time originated.

For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, 28For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

Again Christ went willingly to the cross out of love for humankind, all mankind, the world. It was his great love that drove him there. He was not forced by the decrees of God. He went willingly. He did not call 12 legions of angels as he very well could have.

The thought originated in eternity past in the secret council halls of the all wise, all perfect God.

But motive is the issue.[/QUOTE]
The motive was love.
The motive of a rapist is selfishness, hatred, evil, and so on. Their motives are the exact opposite of the motives of Christ and come from the wicked and depraved heart of man, not from the loving heart of God.

You have expressed the theology of a Muslim not the theology of the Christian God.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

In Genesis 3 he already reconized sin while he was tempting Eve. He must have fell before then.

Can you prove this biblically or is this simply an assumption. How can it truly be shown biblically (without doubt) that this is not his first sin as well? In all honestly it cannot—while he certainly could have sinned before this—all we can say with certain biblical support is that Satan sins by Gen 3.

 

[Luke2427]

You haven't read the passage clearly enough. God did not do it. He gave permission to Satan to afflict Job. Satan did it; not God. God only allowed it to happen. There is a big difference there. The permission was granted to Satan. You cannot attribute the evil back to God.

Your logic is flawed. The death of Christ was ordained before the foundation of the world. Many times did Christ tell his disciples that he would die and rise again. Time and time again it is prophesied in the Old Testament. That is not so with the rape and abortions that go on today. You do not take purpose into account in your reasoning. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ had eternal purpose--the forgiveness of sin to all who believe; the eternal damnation to all who reject Christ.

There is no purpose to those who commit acts of terrorism, murder, abortion, rape, etc. They are acts of the depravity of man's heart. No good comes from them. If you say that these acts were ordained from the foundation of the world on the same level as the death of Christ, what is the difference between your religion and that of Islam. There is no difference. Both are fatalistic.
Whatever God has willed, he has willed. Whatever happens is God's will. It is determined before hand. That is the fatalistic religion of Islam and it is exactly what you are expressing here. The Bible does not teach fatalism.

God's will was that Christ loved us enough to die for our sins.
God's will is not terrorism. It never was.

Herod was wrong in what he did, and shall be judged for it. Christ went to the cross willingly. The Bible says: "I lay my life down, no man takes it from me." He could have called 12 legions of angels, but he didn't. He went willingly.

God the Father did not force God the Son to the cross. Christ prayed in the garden: "Father take this cup from me; nevertheless let thy will be done." His human nature did not want to go through with this. But in spite of that he willingly laid down his life for us. That is love.

Without the love of the Savior there is no Lamb dying for you. He did it willingly out of love for you that you wouldn't have to pay the penalty of your own sins, a penalty that you could never pay. He loved you; that he died for you. You seem oblivious to the great love of God.

Again Christ went willingly to the cross out of love for humankind, all mankind, the world. It was his great love that drove him there. He was not forced by the decrees of God. He went willingly. He did not call 12 legions of angels as he very well could have.

The thought originated in eternity past in the secret council halls of the all wise, all perfect God.

But motive is the issue.
The motive was love.
The motive of a rapist is selfishness, hatred, evil, and so on. Their motives are the exact opposite of the motives of Christ and come from the wicked and depraved heart of man, not from the loving heart of God.

You have expressed the theology of a Muslim not the theology of the Christian God.

Yes, the motive of the sinner is wicked.
But the conclusion that God has no purpose for the tragedies that take place in this world is false. It is biblically falsifiable.

And just because you say that such deeds have no purpose; just because you say that God has no grand and glorious end for these temporary tragedies simply does not make it so.

I have heard of women who testify how God used their rape to do tremendous things in their life.

Corie Ten Boom testified how God accomplished awesome things in her life through the travesties of Nazism. And we know that the slaughter of those Jews by Stalin and Hitler served to bring them back to their homeland and fulfill one of the greatest prophecies in the Bible.

You are wrong that tragedies do not have purposes.

If God has a purpose for the worst of tragedies then it is only reasonable to believe that he has a purpose for every tragedy.

The Bible says so:

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.

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.

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?

The Bible is clear.

 

[kyredneck]

He was cast out of heaven before he tempted her.

Show me that please?

I read the scriptures quite differently. Satan was in Eden BEFORE he sinned:

13 Thou wast in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, the topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was in thee; in the day that thou wast created they were prepared.
14 Thou wast the anointed cherub that covereth: and I set thee, so that thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till unrighteousness was found in thee. Ezek 28

Also, what do you do with this passage?:

And he said unto them, I beheld Satan fallen as lightning from heaven. Lu 10:18

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes Luke, motive is the issue.
All who read this, before your emotions get the better of you, consider Job.

Job 23:1-6

Job Replies: Where Is God?
1 Then Job answered and said:
2 "Today also my complaint is bitter;
my hand is heavy on account of my groaning.
3 Oh, that I knew where I might find him,
that I might come even to his seat!
4 I would lay my case before him
and fill my mouth with arguments.
5 I would know what he would answer me
and understand what he would say to me.
6 Would he contend with me in the greatness of his power?
No; he would pay attention to me.

Job is wanting to know, why.

God replies to Job in chapters 38-41.
If you want the truth read these chapters carefully, as GOD unfolds the truth of HIS absolute sovereignty.

If you have not read the above chapters, then Job's reply makes no sense.
But if you have, you will understand Job's heart.

Job’s Confession and Repentance

1 Then Job answered the LORD and said:
2 "I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
3 'Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?'Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand,
things too wonderful for me, which I did not know.
4 'Hear, and I will speak;
I will question you, and you make it known to me.'
5 I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear,
but now my eye sees you;
6 therefore I despise myself,
and repent in dust and ashes."
(Job 42:1-6 from ESV)

I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
This is the supreme hermeneutic for biblical interpretation.

Therefore, we must be content, that the "motive" of God is Sovereign and Pure.

:thumbs::thumbs:

 

[DHK]

Yes, the motive of the sinner is wicked.
But the conclusion that God has no purpose for the tragedies that take place in this world is false. It is biblically falsifiable.

And just because you say that such deeds have no purpose; just because you say that God has no grand and glorious end for these temporary tragedies simply does not make it so.

I have heard of women who testify how God used their rape to do tremendous things in their life.

Corie Ten Boom testified how God accomplished awesome things in her life through the travesties of Nazism. And we know that the slaughter of those Jews by Stalin and Hitler served to bring them back to their homeland and fulfill one of the greatest prophecies in the Bible.

You are wrong that tragedies do not have purposes.

If God has a purpose for the worst of tragedies then it is only reasonable to believe that he has a purpose for every tragedy.

The Bible says so:

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.

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.

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?

The Bible is clear.

I have heard all those testimonies also. Here is the difference.
God knew before hand that they would happen.
God permitted or allowed them to happen. He does not restrain evil. It is part of the curse, and the depravity of the human heart.

However, God does not ordain evil to happen.
That makes God the author of sin. It makes him the originator of sin.
This is wrong. It is taking Scripture out of context.

God told the nation of Israel that judgment would come. It was prophesied to them through the prophets. They warned them repeatedly. Then God allowed Syria in 722 B.C. to come and over come their forces and take them captive. He allowed the circumstances to be so that they would be taken captive. He didn't force anyone's hand. He did not force Assyria to take Israel. They were the natural enemy of Israel and had fought many wars already. He allowed their forces to be strengthened and Israel's to be weakened. Thus Israel was defeated. God did not force anyone. He did not create evil.

Read through the Book of Judges. You find the same pattern. God does not create evil. You interpret these verses wrong. If you attribute evil to God you have created a fatalistic religion that is no better than Islam. Whatever happens, happens. It is the will of God. Horrible!

 

[kyredneck]

Hank, good post, here's my two cents:

My 2 cents:

Lucifer's sin seems to be of a different nature than Adam's.

Adam and his race (us) have redemption where apparently the devil and his angels do not.

I have no scripture but it seems Satan's motive was to hurt God by corrupting His creation of Adam and Eve which bore His image and likeness.

Actually, I believe Satan's motive was to cause Adam harm by causing him to stumble.

Adam's motive which seems somewhat elusive does not appear to be hatred of God.

He was not deceived but he ate the fruit anyway.

I heard a sermon that brought out a wonderful type (or simile) here. Adam willingly partook of the fruit so that he could be with his wife Eve, just as Christ partook of the cross so that He could have His Bride, the Church.

Wasn't satan's lie "thou shalt not surely die"?

Also, “ye shall be as God”.

What was Adam's motive?
Did he want to know good and evil even if he had to die?
Did he choose the creature (Eve) over the Creator?

Yes, I think so. He wanted to have Eve.

I know folks say satan's sin was pride but I think it was hatred of God and evidently wouldn't want to be saved even if it were offered to him.

Lucifer was in Eden before God created Adam. In short, Satan was first, then along came Adam. Adam was second. I am convinced that Satan's sin was pure ol' jealousy. Consider the element of jealousy in the other examples of first vs second given in the scriptures:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1642358#post1642358

I don't see why this story of firstborn/secondborn should be any different, IMO.

That God made man in His own image and likeness, gave them gender and reproductive power (procreation) and then gave them dominion over the earth was the last straw for satan and his jealousy and hatred rippened into murder. He couldn't murder God so he went after those who bore His image.

Am I all wet?

I don't know. Did you just get out of the shower? I enjoy your posts Hank. Wish you posted more.

 

[glfredrick]

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:


Sin entered the world through Adam. Satan's sin was in heaven.



James 1:13-15 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.



God does not tempt or make man sin. Man sins of his own volition according to his lustful desires.




Thus sayeth the Lord.

Thanks Amy. You have precisely nailed the answer in a simple, efficient, and God-honoring manner.


Skandelon says that no Calvinist can (and implies "will") answer his question. Perhaps we are busy right now? I certainly am, and really do not have time to craft a decent answer. And if this is taken against me as an ad hominem, a pox on your house. Some of us actually work for a living, so be patient. There are answers.

Finally (for now), I advise the readers here to chew on this article for a bit until I can resume. There are two things happening in this (and the other thread that spawned this one) -- the problem of evil, and God's permissive will.

So far, I've not seen much depth on either point in either of the debates. We seem to get caught up in popular expressions and fail to realize that there are depths to plumb.

In any case, the article (pasted in full):

The "perfect will" of God is what you find in Romans 12:2

Do not be conformed to this present world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may test and approve what is the will of God-what is good and well-pleasing and perfect (Romans 12:2).

Notice that here turning one's back on the world, and having one's mind renewed (by God) enables one to discern and experience God's will for you, a will (or we might say purpose or plan) which is good, which is a delight to us and to God, and which has no flaws, no missing pieces -- complete.

Because God is omniscient, He knows what He will accomplish in us. He knows what we will do, and what we would do, in any given circumstance. Thus, His plans for us will never fail; they will never be flawed by some missing piece of information, some unknown detail. God's plan and purpose for each and every believer is for our good, and for His glory (see Romans 8:28).

This includes all the suffering and tragedy that comes to us in life (see 2 Corinthians 1:3-7; 12:7-10).

Having said that there is a "perfect will" let us not conclude that there is an imperfect will of God, so that we might fear we will miss His "perfect will" and be forever doomed to live out a life of misery and failure and frustration. His perfect will takes into account our ignorance, our weakness, or sins, and even the sins of others against us (Genesis 50:20).

The Bible speaks of the "will of God" in several different ways, and it is important to understand the differences.

(1) The decreed will of God. This is God's eternal, foreordained plan and purpose, which will not change and cannot be thwarted. It includes our salvation (Ephesians 1:3-6, etc.) and His choice and calling of Israel (Romans 11:1-2, 29). God's covenant purposes and promises are a part of His decree, and He will not and cannot "change His mind" about these things (see Exodus 32:13). (If you look at verse 14 of Exodus 32, you might say, "But, look, God did change His mind!" No He didn't. The text says that God "changed His mind" about destroying Israel, and making a new nation of Moses. Moses' whole argument is that God made a covenant, and He cannot change His mind, because He is God. God's "changing His mind about destroying Israel" is really His not changing His mind, about saving this nation and bringing them into the land, in fulfillment of His covenant with Abraham.)

(2) There is what we might call the "perceptive will" of God. This is God's will, expressed in the form of principles or precepts given to men. The command not to murder lets us know it is God's will for us not to murder others. The command not to steal makes it clear that God's will for us is not to steal. If I say, "I have discerned that it is God's will for me to rob banks, and to kill those who get in my way", we can confidently say that is not God's will His written Word is the expression of His will. In this sense, many people are seeking God's will when it is already obvious. You don't have to pray about living with your boyfriend; God has spoken (Hebrews 13:4; 1 Corinthians 6:9-20).

(3) There is also God's preferential (desiderative) will. This has to do with what gives God pleasure, and what does not. We know that God loves to show mercy, and yet He will execute judgment (Exodus 34:6-7). It is on this basis that Moses appeals to God to forgive Israel, not only here, but many times (see Numbers 14:17-19). Not only Moses, but others prayed that God would show mercy (Nehemiah 9; Daniel 9). God takes pleasure in the salvation of sinners; He does not take pleasure in pouring out His eternal wrath on sinners (Matthew 18:14; 1 Timothy 2:3-4; 2 Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 18:32; 33:11). When we come to things which are not clearly prescribed as sin, or things which are commanded, our desire should be to do that which pleases God (Romans 12:1; Colossians 1:10; 2 Corinthians 5:9; Ephesians 5:10).

(4) There is what we might call God's "permissive will." This is what God allows, even though it is sin. God allowed Joseph's brothers to betray him, and to deceive their father, so that He might bring the Israelites (few in number) to Egypt, where God would spare them, and they would greatly multiply (Genesis 50:20). God allows man to reject the gospel, the willfully disobey His laws, to persecute the righteous, and so on. But in all of this, God is still in control, and His purposes are being accomplished. His "decretive will" often allows or permits (His permissive will) men to violate His preferential will (what gives Him pleasure) and His prescriptive will (His Word). God's permissive will is never outside His decretive will. God "permits" those things which will lead to the accomplishment of His decretive will.

(5) There is also God's "directive will." This is God's personal guidance in our lives. It does not violate any of the "wills" above. There are times when God wants us at a certain place, doing a certain thing. The Bible most often will not provide us with this direct and personal revelation of His will. I can think of God's directive will being revealed in the "Macedonian call" (Acts 16:6-10). I can see it in the direct guidance of Philip (Acts 8:26) and of Peter and Ananias (Acts 10:1-23). God does guide us personally and directly, but it seems that this is not as common as some would like. This seems to be required at certain points of our life, when specific guidance is needed (see also 1 Timothy 4:14?).

(6) There may be yet another category, that I might call the "discerned" will of God. This is my perception of God's will for my life, which comes through wisdom. You may wish to look at the lesson I've done on this in Proverbs.

 

[Skandelon]

Posted by Skandelon:
This is correct!! We don't just walk up and do it without it coming to mind first.

Okay, now I will try to lay the "groundwork" for the "originator" of sin!!

Isa. 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven

Wat chew talkin bout Willis? (sorry, I couldn't resist and I'm sure I'm not the first.)

Actually, I appreciate the time you took to lay this groundwork, but as I stated before, does moving the origin of evil back to Satan really address the issue?

Placing the blame on Satan doesn't remove the problem regarding the origin of the sinful thought, because if it originates in Satan then you have the same problem as if it originates in man, which is that God must not be in complete control because something was created or originated apart from Him. So, you haven't avoided the issue posed by the question in the OP.

So, did Satan originate the thought "I will ascend into heaven," or did God originate that thought? If Satan, then how do Calvinists defend their position of God being in control over all things when something originated apart from Him? If God, then how do Calvinists defend their position that God is not the author of sin?
__________________

 

[Skandelon]

The problem with this is the question is hopelessly flawed. Asking this question and expecting a cut and dry answer is like asking someone to give a logical, geometrical definition of a square circle.

The fact of the matter is there is a mystery here--something we cannot fit into a neat little box. There are facts that scripture provides that lets us see there is a lot going on, and most of the mechanism we are not privy to.

So, it appears that you appeal to mystery, which ultimately is the position of those who hold to LFW. We just do so prior to impugning God's holiness by suggesting that he has decreed/determined the sinful acts of man.

Those of us who hold to LFW also appeal to mystery, but we do so when it comes to man's self-determination. As Ciocchi, who debated Feinberg, put it: "the choice between available options is what free will is all about . . ., and it is finally mysterious, beyond full explanation, for full explanations presuppose the very determinism the libertarian rejects" (Ciocchi, p. 94).

So, thank you Archangel, you have affirmed the point this question was attempting to prove. Both Calvinists and non-Calvinists appeal to mystery in this debate. :thumbs:

Scripture affirms the following:

1. God is absolutely sovereign
2. Man is absolutely responsible for his actions
3. God brings "evil" (or calamity)
4. God brings disaster
5. In all of God's bringing calamity or disaster, He does not sin.
​

So, we may freely say that God ordains sin, but He doesn't cause it. As one of my seminary professors put it: God stands behind good (ie. is the cause of it) and He stands beside evil (ie. He doesn't cause it, but He chooses not to stop it).

BTW, I don't know any Arminians who would take issue with any of this. Again, well put Archangel!

God forbid I or anyone else have to sit across from parents that have lost their child to a molesting murderer. However, in that case, what is more comforting? God's sovereignty--that He has some plan at work, even if we can't see what He's doing or man's sovereignty--that he can do as he pleases and thwart God's purposes so that there is no purpose in a great and heinous tragedy?

False dichotomy. There is another option besides the two you present. How about the response you gave first?

"God stands behind good (ie. is the cause of it) and He stands beside evil (ie. He doesn't cause it, but He chooses not to stop it)." And He is Sovereign enough and good enough to take even this horrible thing and bring about good.

 

[The Archangel]

You haven't read the passage clearly enough. God did not do it. He gave permission to Satan to afflict Job. Satan did it; not God. God only allowed it to happen. There is a big difference there. The permission was granted to Satan. You cannot attribute the evil back to God.

Actually, friend, I think it is you who has not read the passage clearly enough. Consider the following:

After the first "attack" on Job, in Job 1, the scripture says:

20 Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head and fell on the ground and worshiped. 21 And he said, “Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return. The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.”

22 In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong (emphasis mine)
​

Job's own lips say that God is the one who has taken away. So, who afflicted Job? God did. Did God do it through Satan? Yes. But, ultimately, God is the one who has "taken away."

And just so we know there is no blasphemy in this, the inspired author says "In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong." So for Job to accuse God as the one who has "taken away" is spot-on. If God was not the One behind it, certainly Job would have sinned by charging that He was.

After the second "attack" on Job, in Job 2, the scriptures says:

Then his wife said to him, “Do you still hold fast your integrity? Curse God and die.” 10 But he said to her, “You speak as one of the foolish women would speak. Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips. (emphasis mine)
​

Job is laying the blame for his lack of health on God. Again, did God do this through Satan? Sure. But who is behind Job's poor health? God is.

Job's words "Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil (or calamity)" are very instructive. It simply means that if we say that God has brought good into our lives--through circumstances, etc.--it must also be the case that the evil (or calamity) that comes into our lives is the result of God's work too, in an ultimate sense. Job (and the rest of scripture, I might add) has absolutely no place for the Star-Wars-like dualism of the light side and dark side--as if the good comes from the light and the bad comes from the dark. No, If any good comes to us, is it not God who has done it? If any evil befall us, is it not God who has done it?

Your logic is flawed. The death of Christ was ordained before the foundation of the world. Many times did Christ tell his disciples that he would die and rise again. Time and time again it is prophesied in the Old Testament. That is not so with the rape and abortions that go on today. You do not take purpose into account in your reasoning. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ had eternal purpose--the forgiveness of sin to all who believe; the eternal damnation to all who reject Christ.

There is no purpose to those who commit acts of terrorism, murder, abortion, rape, etc. They are acts of the depravity of man's heart. No good comes from them. If you say that these acts were ordained from the foundation of the world on the same level as the death of Christ, what is the difference between your religion and that of Islam. There is no difference. Both are fatalistic.

"There is no purpose to terrorism, murder, abortion, rape, etc.?" Are you kidding?

Have you not read Genesis 50:20--As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.

Joseph is speaking to his brothers--the very brothers that "terrorized" him, plotted to kill him, and finally (at an older brother's intercession) sold him into slavery. Joseph identifies what they did as evil. But, obviously, there was a greater purpose behind the terrorism inflicted on Joseph by the brothers. God meant the evil actions of the brothers for good--for many people to be kept alive.

In the scope of biblical theology this raises many questions: Without Joseph being sold into slavery by his older brothers, how does Israel (as a nation) become slaves to Egypt? Egypt being slaves in Egypt is required by God's words to Abraham in Genesis 15 "Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years."

Through the evil actions of the brothers, God is super-intending those evil actions for good, for His good purposes, to fulfill His plan, and to magnify His glory.

So to say that evil things serve no purpose in God's world is to miss one of the major themes in all of scripture and to fail at having a truly biblical theology.

Whatever God has willed, he has willed. Whatever happens is God's will. It is determined before hand. That is the fatalistic religion of Islam and it is exactly what you are expressing here. The Bible does not teach fatalism.

You have expressed the theology of a Muslim not the theology of the Christian God.

This is not the case. This is a Red Herring, a Strawman, or whatever on your part.

For you, as a Christian, to say these things are not determined before hand is, in effect, to say that God is making it all up as He goes--which is the textbook definition of Open Theism. Now, I don't think you are an open theist, but it is easy to see how you might get there from your current position.

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

So, it appears that you appeal to mystery, which ultimately is the position of those who hold to LFW. We just do so prior to impugning God's holiness by suggesting that he has decreed/determined the sinful acts of man.

Those of us who hold to LFW also appeal to mystery, but we do so when it comes to man's self-determination. As Ciocchi, who debated Feinberg, put it: "the choice between available options is what free will is all about . . ., and it is finally mysterious, beyond full explanation, for full explanations presuppose the very determinism the libertarian rejects" (Ciocchi, p. 94).

So, thank you Archangel, you have affirmed the point this question was attempting to prove. Both Calvinists and non-Calvinists appeal to mystery in this debate. :thumbs:

Be careful here. I do not appeal to mystery in the same way you are or in the way that the LFW camp does.

The LFW camp sees many options on the table at one time. From a human perspective, I can understand that idea, but I think it horribly short-sighted in the sense of biblical theology.

The reformed position (which is taken from biblical theology) is that God is the Author and we are the actors. As the Author, God writes the script and brings it about to completion. We, as the actors, have the freedom to portray the role in any way we see fit. But, we are not free to act in a manner that is not in line with the Author's script.

As an example--do you know who was originally cast as Indiana Jones? Tom Selleck, not Harrison Ford. Now, had Tom Selleck actually starred as Indiana Jones, the movie and the story, etc. would have, essentially, been the same--in other words, Dr. Jones would not have gone looking for Noah's Ark. Had Selleck starred, though the storyline would have been the same, it would have been a very different move.

So the LFW camp appeals to mystery in much the same way that a child appeals to mystery as he or she observes the powered flight of a 747. The reformed camp, on the other hand, can explain the physics behind lift, thrust-to-weight ratio, etc., all the while acknowledging the "mystery" that is the "Law" of physics.

False dichotomy. There is another option besides the two you present. How about the response you gave first?

"God stands behind good (ie. is the cause of it) and He stands beside evil (ie. He doesn't cause it, but He chooses not to stop it)." And He is Sovereign enough and good enough to take even this horrible thing and bring about good.

No. The phrase "He is sovereign enough and good enough..." is borderline heresy (although, you probably don't intend these words to say what they convey).

God is not "sovereign enough;" God is not "good enough." He is absolutely sovereign and He is absolutely good. To say sovereign enough or good enough is to imply that there is some deficiency in Him and He is struggling to be sovereign or good or, worse, that He is struggling to work good in any situation.

What is more, the verse that you are alluding to does not say what you are suggesting it says. You are suggesting that God is making things OK after the fact. The verse clearly means that God is causing things--before the fact--to work together for good.

God is not running around trying to "fix" things, as your statement suggests. This is why, in the Bible, God is depicted as "seated" on the throne. He is not running to and fro fixing things--like the wizard in The Wizard of Oz. Rather, He is seated--meaning He is causing and watching His plan unfold.

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

Another thought...

Apply the thinking that God does not "cause" abortion, murder, rape, etc. and apply that to cancer.

I have a good friend (a former professor of mine) who has lived his entire life to the glory of God. Four years ago, he was stricken with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Why did that happen? There was no "outside" cause like another person doing this to him. What do you say to him? That God didn't know? That God is not behind it?

The argument that God is not in ultimate control of rape, abortion, murder, etc. (as in ordaining these things, but not causing these things) falls apart when applied to a situation where someone has a disease that they did nothing to get.

The Archangel

 

[Skandelon]

This is an excellent question and like Luther told Erasmus, ""You [i.e., Erasmus] have not worried me with extraneous issues about the papacy, purgatory, indulgences, and such like, *trifles rather than issues ... you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and have aimed for the vital spot."

Luke, thank you for your demeanor and your willingness to address this subject in a Christlike and serious manner.

While agree with what DHK has already argued in regard to your post, I might word a few things a bit differently. For example, I do affirm that God has a purpose in allowing evil. Suffering produces perseverance and that produces character (ref Rom 5), comes to mind as just one example.

The only way we can truly appreciate and love God's holiness and goodness is to experience a world where such things are neglected and where evil exists. In short, one must experience darkness in order to love the light. In that regard, God has a purposed for ALLOWING evil.

Notice, as DHK already pointed out, there is a huge difference in the concept of God ALLOWING evil and his DECREEING/ORDAINING/DETERMINING OR ORIGINATING IT, which is the purpose of this particular OP.

I

noted you referred to temptation as one of the early stages of the origin of a sin. So let me begin by affirming that God indeed tempts no man to sin. He can neither be tempted with evil nor does he tempt any with evil.

Ok, with that said, where does a temptation (i.e. rape of child) originate then? If not with God, then how do you defend your view regarding God's sovereign control over all things in a world where a creature (man or satan) originates a new thought?

1. We must deal with the shock value of your question. It is filled with ethos that cannot go unchecked. I have never dealt with an Arminian who did not mention rape or child molestation in their defense of free will. It is meant to appeal to our sense of ethics. It is not logos because logos, or logic, says- if it is it is. It does not matter if we feel it is right or wrong. This kind of language you employ consists of ethos and pathos. Logos is used to get down to the bottom of a matter and see if it is true. The other two are meant to help win over hearts.

I concede this point, but as I explained to Aaron. The ethos/pathos of this question removes it from the normal pat answers of the sterile theological discussions and forces one to deal with the practical application of their theological position.

However...
The most heinous crime ever committed is not rape or child molestation as horrible as those things truly are. The most horrific sin ever committed was the torture and slaughter of the most innocent man who ever walked the earth; the brutal mutilation and murder of the only begotten Son of God.

This too was argued by Aaron, and as I said to him. The question of the OP is not about the level of the sin's heinousness. I concede that the crucifixion was just as (if not more) heinous than the sin presented in the OP, but that really doesn't address the question of the OP.

I appears you are saying that God has intervened to effectually bring about the crucifixion of Christ for the redemption of the world in the same manner he intervened to effectually bring about the molestation of every child in the course of human history. And because there is a biblical basis for God determining the crucifixion of Jesus (the most heinous of all crimes) that he must be just in determining the molestation of children.

Is that what you are arguing?

If so, I have a rebuttal, but I want to be clear that this is your actual argument.

 

[Skandelon]

Another thought...

Apply the thinking that God does not "cause" abortion, murder, rape, etc. and apply that to cancer.

I have a good friend (a former professor of mine) who has lived his entire life to the glory of God. Four years ago, he was stricken with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Why did that happen? There was no "outside" cause like another person doing this to him. What do you say to him? That God didn't know? That God is not behind it?

Why not follow the advice of your professor and say, "God stands behind good (ie. is the cause of it) and He stands beside evil (ie. He doesn't cause it, but He chooses not to stop it)."

That is an answer we can both agree upon.

 

[Skandelon]

Be careful here. I do not appeal to mystery in the same way you are or in the way that the LFW camp does.

The LFW camp sees many options on the table at one time. From a human perspective, I can understand that idea, but I think it horribly short-sighted in the sense of biblical theology.

The reformed position (which is taken from biblical theology) is that God is the Author and we are the actors. As the Author, God writes the script and brings it about to completion. We, as the actors, have the freedom to portray the role in any way we see fit. But, we are not free to act in a manner that is not in line with the Author's script.

And does not the author of a book not originate even the evil thoughts and acts of his characters? How does this line up with Calvinists insistence that God is not the author of sin?

 

[The Archangel]

Why not follow the advice of your professor and say, "God stands behind good (ie. is the cause of it) and He stands beside evil (ie. He doesn't cause it, but He chooses not to stop it)."

That is an answer we can both agree upon.

But in this case, there was no one acting upon him (as in the example of someone murdering someone).

The only conclusion, then, is that my ailing professor friend (who has fought valiantly!) is afflicted in much the same way Job was--by God.

The question is "why?" Why did God do this to him? What purpose is served by this? etc.

The Archangel