Predestination, Free Will, and a 'Heavenly Language'.

[Mark Quayle]

No that is a fact that can be verified in the bible.

So you assert

 

[disciple Clint]

Ok, explain how God did not cause it, yet chance did not cause it either. It was caused, was it not? Or did it just pop into existence somehow on its own?

Why could it not be caused by someone exercising their agency of free will? God does not need to control every tiny detail in order to be sovereign.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Why could it not be caused by someone exercising their agency of free will? God does not need to control every tiny detail in order to be sovereign.

I did not say the 'free agent' did not cause it. I say that God caused it by mere creation, if no other way. The fact God causes all things does not mean that the 'free agent' is not the cause of whatever he causes, nor does it imply the 'free agent' is not responsible for whatever he chooses to do.

Also, it is simply illogical to say that the 'free agent' can do anything uncaused. The law of causation proves it. All effects are caused. If (and since) God is First Cause, all 'free agents' are caused effects and all things they do (including their decisions) are caused effects. There can be only one first cause.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

I think in creation, God wanted a challenge, perhaps to relieve boredom, and He created free will with moments in which He is engaged with individuals and vast numbers of angels and souls which are almost live, play it by ear and on His feet events for God.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I think in creation, God wanted a challenge, perhaps to relieve boredom, and He created free will with moments in which He is engaged with individuals and vast numbers of angels and souls which are almost live, play it by ear and on His feet events for God.

Seems like an awful lot of speculation based on the notion that God is like humans.

 

[disciple Clint]

I did not say the 'free agent' did not cause it. I say that God caused it by mere creation, if no other way. The fact God causes all things does not mean that the 'free agent' is not the cause of whatever he causes, nor does it imply the 'free agent' is not responsible for whatever he chooses to do.

Also, it is simply illogical to say that the 'free agent' can do anything uncaused. The law of causation proves it. All effects are caused. If (and since) God is First Cause, all 'free agents' are caused effects and all things they do (including their decisions) are caused effects. There can be only one first cause.

So what you have said here is that God is the cause of all things. Since some things are sin, your logic makes God responsible for sin and that can not be.

 

[Mark Quayle]

So what you have said here is that God is the cause of all things. Since some things are sin, your logic makes God responsible for sin and that can not be.

Well, haha, at least you are here agreeing finally that we do not agree!

I find myself having the qualify what you represent me as saying. While it is true that God is the cause of all things, he is the first cause, i.e. not the only cause.

What I think you mean, is that my narrative (which you take for my logic) makes God responsible for sin. In a sense, God is logically responsible for it, in that, he does cause that it be; but that is the weaving of words for the sake of our ability to hold a concept. But no blame can be placed on his shoulders. He is not sinning, in causing that sin come to pass. My logic says simply that God is First Cause, which necessarily implies that absolutely everything descends logically from him by way of causation. If one accepts that God is First Cause, then I don't see how they can dispute that logic. If one does not accept that God is First Cause, then we have nothing to talk about, because I will not accept any other as God.

Bear in mind that sin is not a 'thing' as an atom, or as logic, is, but simply the vitiation (there's a better word that is not coming to mind —ignore some of the implications of this one) of good. It is somewhat analogous to saying that darkness is not a thing, but the lack of light. That might be useful to you in accepting what I am trying to prove —I don't myself find it a particularly satisfying way of arranging my thoughts.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Seems like an awful lot of speculation based on the notion that God is like humans.

God is not so unlike humans, we are made in His likeness. Even pagans love their friends and do acts of charity.

Is it that we know God wants to fully control everything? He knows the end from the beginning, no one can counsel Him, and yet He approached Moses with his son and wife to kill him. However she circumcised her son and cast the skin at Moses feet, and he lived. Later Moses stands in the gap for Israel and saves them from God's wrath many times.

 

[Broken Fence]

Jesus said choose whom you will serve. You can't serve two masters. Paul said Jesus and His Holy Angels or the devil and his angels. I choose Jesus because He choose me.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Jesus said choose whom you will serve. You can't serve two masters. Paul said Jesus and His Holy Angels or the devil and his angels. I choose Jesus because He choose me.

And Paul taught that we are not tempted beyond what we can find a way out of. But also we must hear the word preached. Also, God is the saviour of all, especially those who believe. He loves us all. He wants all of us in His hands but some choose otherwise outside of God's causing it. It is written, my people perish, for their lack of knowledge.

Theodicy leads to many answers regarding the disaster in New York on 9.11. People ask why does a good God let evil happen?

 

[Mark Quayle]

God is not so unlike humans, we are made in His likeness. Even pagans love their friends and do acts of charity.

We are made in his likeness —not he in ours. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."

Is it that we know God wants to fully control everything? He knows the end from the beginning, no one can counsel Him, and yet He approached Moses with his son and wife to kill him. However she circumcised her son and cast the skin at Moses feet, and he lived. Later Moses stands in the gap for Israel and saves them from God's wrath many times.

"Wants to"?? Why would he want to? It's not a matter of him wanting something he wouldn't otherwise have. It is who he is and what he is. He simply does. He is first cause, and therefore causes all things. Control is implied, unless you are Deist, and even then, specific creation is implied, therefore control (from afar by long chain causation).

You seem to think that such things as prayer are not designated by God in my theology. Far from it! God INSTALLED Moses into that position, to reason with God! This is ALL predestined.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Well, haha, at least you are here agreeing finally that we do not agree!

I find myself having the qualify what you represent me as saying. While it is true that God is the cause of all things, he is the first cause, i.e. not the only cause.

What I think you mean, is that my narrative (which you take for my logic) makes God responsible for sin. In a sense, God is logically responsible for it, in that, he does cause that it be; but that is the weaving of words for the sake of our ability to hold a concept. But no blame can be placed on his shoulders. He is not sinning, in causing that sin come to pass. My logic says simply that God is First Cause, which necessarily implies that absolutely everything descends logically from him by way of causation. If one accepts that God is First Cause, then I don't see how they can dispute that logic. If one does not accept that God is First Cause, then we have nothing to talk about, because I will not accept any other as God.

Bear in mind that sin is not a 'thing' as an atom, or as logic, is, but simply the vitiation (there's a better word that is not coming to mind —ignore some of the implications of this one) of good. It is somewhat analogous to saying that darkness is not a thing, but the lack of light. That might be useful to you in accepting what I am trying to prove —I don't myself find it a particularly satisfying way of arranging my thoughts.

Let's look at a case study, a person who was born of fornication. If it is impossible for God to "sin or be tempted by sin", how could he plan a person, who could very well gain salvation, i.e. be elected to salvation, yet born in a sinful act. There are billions of people born to fornication, if God truly is the cause then, he is lying when saying He "can not be tempted by sin neither tempts any man".

 

[disciple Clint]

Well, haha, at least you are here agreeing finally that we do not agree!

I find myself having the qualify what you represent me as saying. While it is true that God is the cause of all things, he is the first cause, i.e. not the only cause.

What I think you mean, is that my narrative (which you take for my logic) makes God responsible for sin. In a sense, God is logically responsible for it, in that, he does cause that it be; but that is the weaving of words for the sake of our ability to hold a concept. But no blame can be placed on his shoulders. He is not sinning, in causing that sin come to pass. My logic says simply that God is First Cause, which necessarily implies that absolutely everything descends logically from him by way of causation. If one accepts that God is First Cause, then I don't see how they can dispute that logic. If one does not accept that God is First Cause, then we have nothing to talk about, because I will not accept any other as God.

Bear in mind that sin is not a 'thing' as an atom, or as logic, is, but simply the vitiation (there's a better word that is not coming to mind —ignore some of the implications of this one) of good. It is somewhat analogous to saying that darkness is not a thing, but the lack of light. That might be useful to you in accepting what I am trying to prove —I don't myself find it a particularly satisfying way of arranging my thoughts.

In a sense, God is logically responsible for it, in that, he does cause that it be; but that is the weaving of words for the sake of our ability to hold a concept. But no blame can be placed on his shoulders. He is not sinning, in causing that sin come to pass.

Sorry but God is in no way responsible for sin, you can rearrange your wording any way you like, God being first cause does in no way make Him responsible for sin in any way.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

KJV James 1:13-15
13Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Did God cause lust?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Let's look at a case study, a person who was born of fornication. If it is impossible for God to "sin or be tempted by sin", how could he plan a person, who could very well gain salvation, i.e. be elected to salvation, yet born in a sinful act. There are billions of people born to fornication, if God truly is the cause then, he is lying when saying He "can not be tempted by sin neither tempts any man".

I'm having a hard time seeing cohesion to your post. Can you state it another way? Are you saying that for God to plan for someone to be born of a sinful act is for God to sin?

Regardless, it sounds like you are saying that Solomon was not whom God had in mind all along to follow David as King of Israel, in his promise to Abraham.

 

[Mark Quayle]

KJV James 1:13-15
13Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Did God cause lust?

I expect this was directed at me.

For God to cause (and that, on purpose) that Satan fall, and that sin enter the world, is not the same as to say that God tempts anyone. Satan tempts, and we tempt ourselves, we are tempted when we are drawn away of our own lusts and enticed.

(Lust, depending on your definition (or use) of it, can be sin, or may not be sin. If 'lust' only means 'desire', then no, lust is not sin. If 'lust' means 'the result of desire indulged in any way against God's command', then yes, it is sin.)

You probably already know that God uses means to accomplish his ends. In our logical sequences, it is reasonable to say that God's causation of sin is many degrees (or chain links) removed from the sin, as the chain of causation would apply. It is NOT reasonable to say that anything came about by mere chance. And 'freewill' requires mere chance, or it requires that one person be in some way better than another, in order to be able to choose better. It doesn't "just happen". All things other than first cause, are caused, either directly by first cause, or by other causes (further down the chain of causation) that are themselves caused.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Sorry but God is in no way responsible for sin, you can rearrange your wording any way you like, God being first cause does in no way make Him responsible for sin in any way.

Ok, remove the wording of "'responsible' for sin" from your library wherever it has been applied to God. It changes nothing. I don't say God sinned. I say God caused that sin be, as I have just described to another poster. Nothing can happen by mere chance. Therefore, all things that are not first cause, are effects of first cause, either immediately or by degrees removed from first cause, i.e. from further down the chain of causation. The only other supposed ways that anything can happen is by the notion of one person who chooses well being in some way superior to another who chooses well (but that too is by causation), or by being a 'small' first cause himself, which contradicts the necessary implications of God being first cause. God uses means to accomplish his ends.

 

[Clare73]

Sorry but God is in no way responsible for sin, you can rearrange your wording any way you like, God being first cause does in no way make Him responsible for sin in any way.

Correct.

God is not responsible for sin when he creates a being who is able not to sin.
The responsibility for sin then lies with the created being, not God.

However, sin in the world is part of God's plan in accomplishing his purpose.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I'm having a hard time seeing cohesion to your post. Can you state it another way? Are you saying that for God to plan for someone to be born of a sinful act is for God to sin?

Regardless, it sounds like you are saying that Solomon was not whom God had in mind all along to follow David as King of Israel, in his promise to Abraham.

What I am saying is that there is inconsistency in the idea that "God Planned everything", because if he planned acts of fornication, or adultery (Solomon), then it could not be said:

James 1:13 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:

And in Genisis, God was shocked by how bad man had become. God could only be shocked if man had free will choices, God did not plan, or predestinate, their behavior.

Gen 6:5-7 And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And Jehovah said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the ground; both man, and beast, and creeping things, and birds of the heavens; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

 

[disciple Clint]

Ok, remove the wording of "'responsible' for sin" from your library wherever it has been applied to God. It changes nothing. I don't say God sinned. I say God caused that sin be, as I have just described to another poster. Nothing can happen by mere chance. Therefore, all things that are not first cause, are effects of first cause, either immediately or by degrees removed from first cause, i.e. from further down the chain of causation. The only other supposed ways that anything can happen is by the notion of one person who chooses well being in some way superior to another who chooses well (but that too is by causation), or by being a 'small' first cause himself, which contradicts the necessary implications of God being first cause. God uses means to accomplish his ends.

honestly, your logic is faulty, God being first cause does not make God responsible for everything that happens, I guess you could blame God for giving man free will but blaming God for what man does with that free will is going too far.