What causes a believer to sin?

[revmwc]

I didn't see the Old Sin Nature as a choice, but I guess as the Old Sin Nature brings temptation we must chosse to give in to it or not, that would make it our will. Just as Adam used his will to eat of the fruit after Eve was tempted and did it.

 

[Skandelon]

How is it that "SOME" Calvinists argue that for God to maintain complete Sovereignty he must be the ultimate cause of all things? Would that not include the sinful choices of man?

Why is it that man can willingly choose to sin while God maintains sovereignty but man can't willingly choose to repent and believe while God maintains his sovereignty?

 

[J.D.]

The immediate cause of my sins is my own sinful nature. However, God must be willing to permit my sins or else he would transfer me to a glorified state. In that sense, it is God's will for me to sin.

 

[Skandelon]

The immediate cause of my sins is my own sinful nature. However, God must be willing to permit my sins or else he would transfer me to a glorified state. In that sense, it is God's will for me to sin.

I understand and I agree that God must permit even sinful choices, but what I'm looking for is the origin of that sinful intent. As one who believes in contra-casual free will I have no problem giving man the ability of first cause choice, thus making him the first cause of his evil intent, but Calvinists don't typically allow for this, because it would have a choice of man informing God. Thus, I'm attempting to get to the origin of the evil intent in the Calvinistic system: Is is of God or man?

If man, as the vote count indicates, then how does that not violate the Calvinistic concept of complete sovereignty and rejection of contra-causal free will?

If God, why doesn't the vote indicate as much? And how does one holding this view defend against the accusation of God being the author of sin/evil?

 

[glazer1972]

The pastor of the church I attended sunday said, "You are not a sinner because you sin...You sin because you are a sinner."

 

[J.D.]

The pastor of the church I attended sunday said, "You are not a sinner because you sin...You sin because you are a sinner."

That is a true saying. Think about the implications of that statement and see if the rest of your theology matches up to it.

 

[J.D.]

I understand and I agree that God must permit even sinful choices, but what I'm looking for is the origin of that sinful intent. As one who believes in contra-casual free will I have no problem giving man the ability of first cause choice, thus making him the first cause of his evil intent, but Calvinists don't typically allow for this, because it would have a choice of man informing God. Thus, I'm attempting to get to the origin of the evil intent in the Calvinistic system: Is is of God or man?

If man, as the vote count indicates, then how does that not violate the Calvinistic concept of complete sovereignty and rejection of contra-causal free will?

If God, why doesn't the vote indicate as much? And how does one holding this view defend against the accusation of God being the author of sin/evil?

Immediate cause and first cause are not the same. God is "first cause" of all things - in a decretive sense - which ESTABLISHES second causes rather than ruling them out.

 

[Skandelon]

Immediate cause and first cause are not the same.

I understand that, so you are saying in fact that God is the originator (first cause) of man's sinful intent?

God is "first cause" of all things - in a decretive sense

What do you mean by a "decretive" sense? Do you mean God permissively decreed the intent to sin in that he knew it would be originated by the man and allowed it, or that God originated the intent and thus created the man with the intent God originated? If the former don't you have man "informing God" and if the latter don't you have God authoring sin?

 

[J.D.]

so you are saying in fact that God is the originator (first cause) of man's sinful intent?

I do not use the term "First Cause" where sinful men would warp its true meaning. Apparently I should not have used here either. You inject the word "originator" where I did not imply it. If you understand First Cause, as you say you do, you would not interject that word; or else you are arguing deceitfully.

Sin originates in man, not God. Man sinned according to God's design (First Cause), not according to God's impulse (direct cause).

If there are people that believe in direct cause, you'll have to argue with them about that.

 

[J.D.]

What do you mean by a "decretive" sense? Do you mean God permissively decreed the intent to sin in that he knew it would be originated by the man and allowed it, or that God originated the intent and thus created the man with the intent God originated? If the former don't you have man "informing God" and if the latter don't you have God authoring sin?

God's decree to allow sin does not result in man informing God. I don't know where you get that.

 

[Skandelon]

God's decree to allow sin does not result in man informing God. I don't know where you get that.

If God merely permits man to sin, in that man originates the sinful intent, then God must have come to know of that intent being that it didn't originate in him. That would be man informing God, even if through God's foreknowledge of that origination. Understand?

 

[J.D.]

If God merely permits man to sin, in that man originates the sinful intent, then God must have come to know of that intent being that it didn't originate in him. That would be man informing God, even if through God's foreknowledge of that origination. Understand?

I don't see how Adam's "intent" to sin negates God's omniscience.

 

[Skandelon]

I don't see how Adam's "intent" to sin negates God's omniscience.

I'm saying that if the sinful intent originates apart from God then it must become known by God. How does God eternally know something that he doesn't originate?

The concept of foreknowledge connotes the idea of someone coming to know of something before hand, but it doesn't necessarily mean always knowing something in such a way that it must have originated there. Make sense?

 

[J.D.]

if the sinful intent originates apart from God then it must become known by God.

I see what you are saying. You assert this theory but fail to prove it. There is no logical argument that requires that things originating (coming to be) "outside of God", as you put it (again, not my words), necessitates that God must learn of these things or that He did not decree them, having eternal design of them.

That's all I have to say - as Shawn Hannity puts it - you can have the last word. Good night.

 

[Skandelon]

There is no logical argument that requires that things originating (coming to be) "outside of God", as you put it (again, not my words), necessitates that God must learn of these things or that He did not decree them, having eternal design of them.

Well, I agree that God permissively decrees sin, but I'm just attempting to get an explanation as to how an evil intent can originate in man without violating the concept of Sovereignty some seem to promote here. I don't think there is probably a sufficient answer from either perspective because its beyond us, but I'm just hoping some will acknowledge the mystery of it all instead of insisting one camp has a monopoly on true divine sovereignty.

 

[webdog]

The pastor of the church I attended sunday said, "You are not a sinner because you sin...You sin because you are a sinner."

Apply this principle to actual sins (murder, child molester, rapist, etc.) and see if it still holds water.

"You are not a child molester because you molest children...you molest children because you are a child molester"