-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
God allows but does not author evil
- Thread starter Van
- Start date
Read Isaiah 44:24-28. In verse 26, where God says He confirms the word of his servant, it means He brings about what His servant prophesies. Where it says He performs or fulfills the purpose of His messengers, it is saying God causes it to happen. God prophesies that the cities of Judea will be built, and then it says that God will raise them up, again fulfilling prophecy by intervention to bring it about.
The word fulfill means to repay, the idea is that when God purposes or says something an obligation is created which is repaid when God brings it about. He fulfills prophecy.
The word fulfill means to repay, the idea is that when God purposes or says something an obligation is created which is repaid when God brings it about. He fulfills prophecy.
Reply
You are missing nothing, your view match was scripture says.
But note that God did not look into a crystal ball and see a future event and then tell us what the fixed future held. The pagan view is God somehow, out side of time, views a metaphysical realm where the future already exists. Not how scripture describe prophecy.
You are missing nothing, your view match was scripture says.
But note that God did not look into a crystal ball and see a future event and then tell us what the fixed future held. The pagan view is God somehow, out side of time, views a metaphysical realm where the future already exists. Not how scripture describe prophecy.
1. There is no way anyone is going to be able to understand your views unless you are willing to clarify when people try to restate them. That is part of discussion, one person says, "what I hear you saying is this____________...it that right?" And then you tell them the specific points where they are off the mark, or misunderstood what you said. I cannot see how your view is different than view "V" in my post. If that is not what "contingent" means, then what is?
2. You have said "God is not the author of sins." Yet you have said that "God desired that Adam sin." You have said God does predestine some sins (like those of Peter), but they should not be considered as sins that warrant punishment, since God predestined them. If the views of EVERYONE else on this entire board are entirely incomprehensible...then you should at least admit that your views are equally so.
3. Which brings me to this: When you say, "FOLKS, They've got nothing!" I'm not sure who you are talking to, since EVERYONE I have seen post on these issues (omniscience & knowing the future) disagrees with you. I really would like to see one link to someone else who has written a view that coincides with yours. Who, in the world of Theological writers, do you think has it right, since it is obvious that the Calvinists, Arminians, & Open theists have it wrong?
Regarding your question Specifically: God fulfills prophesy simply by not saying he is going to do things, unless he is actually going to do them. And, he knows the future so that he knows that what he says he will do at one point in history is actually the appropriate thing to do late in time when the event happens. The course of history does not surprise him such that he is forced to Not do what he prophesied to do.
Still no answer!!!
A discussion means we both ask questions and both answer them. Not you ask question, but do not answer mine.
We are not discussing my views, but what the bible says. I have referenced what the bible says, you disagree but provide no scripture to support your view.
Lets take the question, how does God fulfill prophecy. I stated my view, and Amy G stated hers. Both were in agreement with Isaiah 44:24-28. Winman said that view is wrong, but did not provide a verse that says God does not make happen what He declares. And what have you contributed? [EDIT] I see where you actually answered the question.
A discussion means we both ask questions and both answer them. Not you ask question, but do not answer mine.
We are not discussing my views, but what the bible says. I have referenced what the bible says, you disagree but provide no scripture to support your view.
Lets take the question, how does God fulfill prophecy. I stated my view, and Amy G stated hers. Both were in agreement with Isaiah 44:24-28. Winman said that view is wrong, but did not provide a verse that says God does not make happen what He declares. And what have you contributed? [EDIT] I see where you actually answered the question.
Last edited by a moderator:
God is not the author of sin. This means God does not compel you to sin. And when, as an exception, God does use someone, i.e. Judas, for His purpose, to the extent the sin was compelled God does not attach penalty.
God desired for Adam to sin, and His plan of redemption was based on mankind needing redemption from the Fall of Adam. However, rather than compel Adam to sin, i.e. predestine it, God allowed Adam to choose to sin. Yes He arranged it, putting the tree in the Garden and allowing Satan and Eve to test Him, but Adam sinned volitionally, and therefore the penalty of the Fall attached.
To pretend this view is incomprehensible is absurd, it was influenced by folks like Pink, a Calvinist. But most importantly is based on scripture. Adam sinned, penalty attached, and the reason from the text given is not God compelled Adam, but Adam listened to Eve who was in turn deceived by Satan. In the New Testament, it makes clear Adam knowingly violated God's command, so his sin was not like those where a person sins but does not realize they are sinning, like before the Law was given.
God desired for Adam to sin, and His plan of redemption was based on mankind needing redemption from the Fall of Adam. However, rather than compel Adam to sin, i.e. predestine it, God allowed Adam to choose to sin. Yes He arranged it, putting the tree in the Garden and allowing Satan and Eve to test Him, but Adam sinned volitionally, and therefore the penalty of the Fall attached.
To pretend this view is incomprehensible is absurd, it was influenced by folks like Pink, a Calvinist. But most importantly is based on scripture. Adam sinned, penalty attached, and the reason from the text given is not God compelled Adam, but Adam listened to Eve who was in turn deceived by Satan. In the New Testament, it makes clear Adam knowingly violated God's command, so his sin was not like those where a person sins but does not realize they are sinning, like before the Law was given.
Last edited by a moderator:
12 Strings said:
This is a typical rewrite of scripture, adding to the text. God declares the end from the beginning = scripture. God knows the end, and then sometimes declared that end, and then that end just happens because God had predestined it anyway=12 Strings.
12 Strings, you do not seem to believe in scripture alone, but in a rewrite by man made doctrine that renders whatever scriptures says to no effect.
Nowhere in scripture do we have God looking at a fixed future and allowing it to happen. God makes His declarations of prophecy happen by intervention, He confirms His messengers.
Last edited by a moderator:
jonathan.borland
Active Member
Why did Jesus call him a devil, say he wasn't clean like the others, and Peter say he went to his own place after abandoning the ministry? Judas confessed Jesus in the garden, but didn't know Jesus. Peter denied Jesus, but actually knew him. Both sinned, one's repentance was artificial and ineffectual, the other's was genuine and accepted.
jonathan.borland
Active Member
Not to mention Jesus saying it would have been better for Judas if he had never been born. This pretty much proves he's in hell, since I imagine that heaven is to be preferred over never existing.
Reply to rewrite
Calvinism rests on such redefinition of words as demonstrated above. If God predestines something, He causes that predestined event to occur. Lets say something is going to happen, i.e. a huge earthquake occurs on the sea bottom, and generates a Tsunami. If God knows that that Tsunami is going to hit the coast and kill 200,000 people, their deaths are predestined, in that no other outcome can occur.
Calvinism likes to hide God's responsibility for those deaths, by saying secondary things caused those deaths. But in a world where "everything is predestined by God" then God caused the Tsunami, God caused those people to be on the beach at that time, and God caused those people to die. There is no escape if everything is predestined by God, He is the cause because He predestined it to occur.
Now a "real" secondary cause, i.e. not a cause predestined by God, such as me shooting a gun of my own volition, with the gun pointing toward my foot, means I am responsible and caused that bullet to smash into my foot, even though God created all the atoms, molecules and laws of physics employed in my misadventure.
Calvinists like to pretend, their view is of "real" secondary causes, but when you peel the onion, you find their exhaustive determinism hiding below the layers of obfuscation.
Calvinism rests on such redefinition of words as demonstrated above. If God predestines something, He causes that predestined event to occur. Lets say something is going to happen, i.e. a huge earthquake occurs on the sea bottom, and generates a Tsunami. If God knows that that Tsunami is going to hit the coast and kill 200,000 people, their deaths are predestined, in that no other outcome can occur.
Calvinism likes to hide God's responsibility for those deaths, by saying secondary things caused those deaths. But in a world where "everything is predestined by God" then God caused the Tsunami, God caused those people to be on the beach at that time, and God caused those people to die. There is no escape if everything is predestined by God, He is the cause because He predestined it to occur.
Now a "real" secondary cause, i.e. not a cause predestined by God, such as me shooting a gun of my own volition, with the gun pointing toward my foot, means I am responsible and caused that bullet to smash into my foot, even though God created all the atoms, molecules and laws of physics employed in my misadventure.
Calvinists like to pretend, their view is of "real" secondary causes, but when you peel the onion, you find their exhaustive determinism hiding below the layers of obfuscation.
Of course not:
Jas 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.
Jas 1:14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.
Jas 1:15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.
Reply to misrepresentation
I too believe Judas is in Hades awaiting in torment his eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire. Judas was a sinner and fully responsible for his volitional sins.
However, to the extent God compelled Judas to betray Jesus, i.e. allowing Satan to enter him to fulfill the prophecy of the betrayal, those actions, I believe, did not have penalty attached. And yes this is highly speculative, but as far as I can determine is the only view that fits with all scripture.
I too believe Judas is in Hades awaiting in torment his eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire. Judas was a sinner and fully responsible for his volitional sins.
However, to the extent God compelled Judas to betray Jesus, i.e. allowing Satan to enter him to fulfill the prophecy of the betrayal, those actions, I believe, did not have penalty attached. And yes this is highly speculative, but as far as I can determine is the only view that fits with all scripture.
Reply to Truth!
This is truth, thanks!
But lets be clear about the meaning of the word "tempted." The idea is being lead astray "for the purpose of evil" i.e. something that will result in punishment by God.
Lets take a case where we are allowed to be tempted by secondary causes, i.e. a deceived Eve. God had a godly purpose in allowing for and actually arranging Adam's fall, but it was Adam's ungodly desires that caused him to listen to Eve. Now we do not know the rest of the story, did this result in Adam becoming a stronger servant of God, which is suggested by the events surrounding the birth of Seth, or to his destruction? The Bible does not tell us. But what we do know is God does not punish one person for the actions of another, i.e. He does not punish the son for the sins of the father.
OTOH we are tested with adversity for the purpose of building up our perseverance.
This is truth, thanks!
But lets be clear about the meaning of the word "tempted." The idea is being lead astray "for the purpose of evil" i.e. something that will result in punishment by God.
Lets take a case where we are allowed to be tempted by secondary causes, i.e. a deceived Eve. God had a godly purpose in allowing for and actually arranging Adam's fall, but it was Adam's ungodly desires that caused him to listen to Eve. Now we do not know the rest of the story, did this result in Adam becoming a stronger servant of God, which is suggested by the events surrounding the birth of Seth, or to his destruction? The Bible does not tell us. But what we do know is God does not punish one person for the actions of another, i.e. He does not punish the son for the sins of the father.
OTOH we are tested with adversity for the purpose of building up our perseverance.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you don't believe that scripture to say "God created evil" then explain what you think it means.So you honestly believes that evil comes directly from God? WOW!!
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
That verse is not talking about moral evil (sin). It's about natural calamity (i.e. earthquakes etc).
Skandelon is correct here. God doesn't create moral evil.
ESV: "I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the LORD, who does all these things."
NIV: "I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things."
KJV: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."
Even in the KJV, "light is opposite of dark. Peace isn't oppose of moral evil.
- " Evil is natural or moral. Natural evil is any thing which produces pain, distress, loss or calamity, or which in any way disturbs the peace, impairs the happiness, or destroys the perfection of natural beings."
The "evil" in Isaiah is natural and not moral evil as translated in the KJV per context.
Last edited by a moderator:
convicted1
Guest
God IS Light, and there is no darkness in Him. How can Light create darkness? Light and darknes have no communion with each other.