God, logic and His attributes

I ask you the same question that I asked Skypair earlier on in this thread: How would you define "sin", if you believe it to be something that God could (if He so wished) definitely engage in? If (as I believe) sin is going against God's will, then God cannot sin, not because He lacks power, but because of what sin is. God does all His holy will -the idea of Him being forced to do something against His own will, that is, sin, seems ridiculous. Do we believe in a God who is less than all powerful? Surely we would have to, if we also were to believe that God could fall into temptation and sin.

 

What view of God do we have that usually prompts us to ask these sorts of questions?

 

Don't you find it instructive that the Bible never sets out to prove but assumes God in all His glory?

 

God always acts in keeping with His nature, for He can do no less. He does whatever pleases Him (Ps 115:3).

 

God is 100% faithful and in accord with His attributes, and it is impossible to conceive of this any other way, without diminishing who God is and what He does.

 

Okay, this afternoon I will devote time to a response. I want you to know, however, that what you have asked is no simple task to answer. Not because it cannot be answered but that in answering I will have to conceded to my own finite capacity to explain the mechanics of God. While the God has revealed Himself to us in Scripture to the satisfaction of Himself that what He has revealed is sufficient for us at this time, it is not the FULL revelation of God, His person, or the mechanics of His operation so I will not be able to fully, exhaustively and definitively respond so that every single question is answered and no possible objections or further inquiries justified. In fact my hope is it will lead to further illumination on both our parts and that is the best thing in view anyway. So this afternoon I will devote time for a response.

 

Okay, here.

I will assume for now that my response will be received and responded to in like detail as you are requesting a response to a question and conflict you pose that requires more than a mild reference or two or casual consideration.

I stated that God is not an agent of foreknowledge or for that matter, any of His attributes. Another way of saying that is that God is not an effect of foreknowledge, neither are the acts of God an effect of foreknowledge or His attributes.

This prompted the legitimate question: How does God relate to His attributes?

First, God is an agent of Himself. His attributes combine to make up God (those attributes revealed in Scripture).

The intelligence or mentality of God acts as the determiner of what characteristics of his what attributes will function or need to function in order to accomplish whatever He determines.

This is how mentality works and the Bible makes clear God has a mentality, a Divine one to be sure. So, instead of God possessing foreknowledge and being compelled to act upon that foreknowledge in any and every situation, this dimension of His attributes is used to serve His determinations. God does not exist to serve foreknowledge but foreknowledge is present in God to serve Him.

An attribute is a capacity but not a mentality. Attributes don’t make determinations, mentality does. Attributes are capacities that enable mental determinations to be accomplished.

Even the attribute of omniscience is not a mentality but describes the mentality of God, all knowing. God is not an agent or effect of omniscience, rather omniscience is an effect of God and exists to serve God.

In the case of God, His mentality determines what it determines and His attributes give Him the capacity to accomplish that. In a crude sense the attributes of God are subordinate to the mentality of God.

Let’s say you can run 100 meters in 10.9 seconds. Does this mean every time you travel 100 meters you are going to run it in 10.9 seconds? Of course not. I realize you and I are not God but the illustration is legitimate in making a point.

Because God possesses an attribute it does not necessarily require that part of His essence to be manifested in His acts. Remember my earlier comment that spurred this thread:

Let me be clear. I am not saying God, by not necessarily acting in acquiescence to one or all of His attributes is diminishing Himself, God cannot diminish, but that ultimately the employment of His attributes are resolved, not by the attributes themselves but by His mentality, His determinations. And you can be sure that those determinations never lead God to do anything that can be described or understood as God not being 100% faithful to His essence.

Again, the hope is my response will be considered and prompt equally challenging and thoughtful reflection.

 

Hi David,

If God is all powerful, God isn't limited by anything..
I paid attention to what you said and it got me to rethink this again. It seems God can have more than one will as Christ and the Father's seems different in the prayer of Christ. Even though I believe the two are the same God.
Mat 26:39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

I respect your view on this but I can't accept it. We see God from a very limited human brain. There are lots of things I don't understand to be sure but if all things are possible with God then, God is all powerful. In Order to be all powerful, God must be able to choose whether or not to sin. Granted it's not His will to sin, no matter His desires as He had as Christ. However God can choose to go against His own will as illustrated in Mat 26:39. Man himself can also go against his own will and does all the time. It's not my will that I break my Savior's heart and sin but, I do.
Why should I think I would have an ability that God doesn't have?
MB

 

I agree. And here's an excellent example:

This displays your inability to grasp logical contradictions. Sin is disobedience. God cannot disobey Himself. That's a logical impossibility like "God creating something so heavy He Himself cannot lift it."

Sin is not an ability. It's an inability. It is the inability to be perfectly obedient. God doesn't have that problem.

 

All powerful...omnipotent doesn't mean nor should be defined with the assumption that it includes the capacity for self-contradiction. Reality, particularly the reality of God is just that, a reality. For something to be real it cannot exist contradictory to itself, otherwise it isn't real.

This very basic truth of the structure of reality, that which is, makes it impossible for God to exist in a self-contradictory manner, or else He would fail to be what he is.

The capacity to or the possibility of failure (sin) by God is contradictory to the reality of God.

 

So, ...........

Are we agreed, that there are things impossible for God?

 

Well, as long as we're trying to go deep into theology, here goes:

Orthodox doctrinal statements over the centuries all hold God to be "simple" as compared with compound. Check them out, you'll see. God is therefore not made of parts or components. If he were, something would have to have put him together. God is therefore a simple, unified being.

Further, He must be infinite; for if he were finite, he would have had to have a beginning. Therefore the orthodox, classical position on God is that he is simple and infinite; as contrasted with compound and finite.

Because God is simple and infinite, then whatever "attributes" he has, he therefore is that. If he has knowledge, then he is infinite knowledge. This is true because if part of him were to possess knowledge, and part of him not, then he would be compound, made of parts.

If he has love, he is love. Therefore "God is love" is literally true. (but it does not follow that "love is God" for that is not logical.)

God is not a bundle of attributes. Rather, he is an infinite being that is omniscient, and all the other omni-'s.

If God is loving, and just, then he is always loving justice, and justly loving. None of his attributes are contradictory, diminish , or compete with the others. This is one of the problems with the calvinist / arminian debate -- both sides forget that God is always just, and always loving, in every act that he does. He cannot decide to be less just, or less loving, for he is infinite.

Remember, there is no "part of God" (he's simple, remember) and he does not possess an attribute the same way we possess an attribute. For example, a stone is gray and hard. The hardness does not force out the gray, nor vice versa. It is 100% gray, and 100% hard, all through. If it were an infinite stone, it would be infinitely gray and infinitely hard.

Whew.

 

(First, sorry I did not reply sooner, but for some reason, I did not get the usual notification of your message, though I have been notified of other new messages on the thread).

I think we still have to come back to what sin actually is. 1 John 3.4 says:

Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and ​

sin is lawlessness.​

Does that mean breaking the laws of the US, the UK, Japan, or whatever country we live in? Surely not - it refers to God's laws, God's will. How can God go against His own will? Whatever He decides to do, that is His will. That is an expression of His omnipotence.

I do not agree that Matthew 26.39 is any indication that God can choose to go against His own will. Jesus Christ was fully Man as well as being fully God. As Man, the thought of the physical sufferings alone must have filled Him with dread, to say nothing of that event which we cannot even begin to imagine, when, as the Bearer of His people's sins, He endured separation from His heavenly Father.

I continue to ask how you would define "sin", in a way that is biblical, and which agrees with your idea of God Himself being able to sin.

 

Two things are clear:

1. I referred to orthodoxy myself and then you, in some odd form of presumption, tell me to check them out. That is the worse kind of arrogance and has no place in debate. You presume I haven't by telling me to check them out when I mentioned them myself.

2. You state God must be infinite, good not one said he wasn't and that isn't being debated.

I am sorry friend, but your capacity for responding to the context of statements and the ideology of a posting on the whole appears to me to be wanting severely and I am going to skip any further dialogue with you.