Is God the "first cause of everything" (including sin) as the Westminster Confession says?

[Marvin Knox]

Non Reformed Christians here in the forum would say that the confession got it all wrong in saying that. They say this because sin exists in the world and God cannot in any way be said to be the cause of sin.

The reasoning goes that God's in any way causing sin would be an act of evil.

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

What say you and why?

 

[EmSw]

Non Reformed Christians here in the forum would say that the confession got it all wrong in saying that. They say this because sin exists in the world and God cannot in any way be said to be the cause of sin.

The reasoning goes that God's in any way causing sin would be an act of evil.

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

What say you and why?

Why would one glory in such a belief?

James tells us where sin originates, but that would put a giant hole in Reformed beliefs. So, I see where you have to originate your own thoughts (Isaiah 55:9).

 

[FreeGrace2]

Non Reformed Christians here in the forum would say that the confession got it all wrong in saying that. They say this because sin exists in the world and God cannot in any way be said to be the cause of sin.

The reasoning goes that God's in any way causing sin would be an act of evil.

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

What say you and why?

I cannot imagine why the notion that God is the "ultimate source" of evil could be a "glorious concept" in any sense of the meaning.

Pinning the actions of created beings on God as source is no different than pinning the actions of people who use guns on the gun makers. How does that make any sense at all?

No gun maker is responsible for how individuals use their products. That would be insane, though I know there are insane lawyers who do use that argument in their bigotted anti-gun stance.

Or pinning the actions of drivers on the car makers as the source of the result of the actions of the drivers, rather than on the drivers individually.

At least you've openly admitted the Calvinist acceptance of the idea that God is the ultimate source of evil. Amazing.

Why it is so difficult to accept the reality that God created creatures with freedom to choose? Why or how is that any less of a "glorious concept"?

Maybe a better question is why does the idea of a God given ability to choose freely so threatening?

 

[James Is Back]

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

So in the Reformed mindset if that is what they believe then Christ didn't die for the sins of man but died for the sins caused by God. Now the absurdity in that is beyond reproach!

 

[Marvin Knox]

Interesting responses.

So what do you all say is the first cause or ultimate source of everything if not God?

By the way - I can't think of anything more gloriously comforting, as a creature living in this mess of a world, than knowing that God has planned every detail from the beginning to the end of this age.

Nor can I think of anything more disconcerting than believing that He has not.

 

[EmSw]

Interesting responses.

So what do you all say is the first cause or ultimate source of everything if not God?

I'll let James answer.

James 1
14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed.
15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

That would be man's desires or lusts. When lust has conceived, it GIVES BIRTH to sin. Since God tempts no one, He is not the source or first cause.

 

[OzSpen]

Non Reformed Christians here in the forum would say that the confession got it all wrong in saying that. They say this because sin exists in the world and God cannot in any way be said to be the cause of sin.

The reasoning goes that God's in any way causing sin would be an act of evil.

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

What say you and why?

So it's a 'glorious concept' that that 5-year-old was raped by a 50 year-old male and that first cause, the ultimate source, is God Himself.

I find that to be repugnant theology. How do you defend that view biblically?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Interesting responses.

So what do you all say is the first cause or ultimate source of everything if not God?

By the way - I can't think of anything more gloriously comforting, as a creature living in this mess of a world, than knowing that God has planned every detail from the beginning to the end of this age.

Nor can I think of anything more disconcerting than believing that He has not.

So are you saying that there are no secondary causes in your world that harmonise with the sovereignty of God?

• Was God the first cause of the September 11, 2001 events,
  
• The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki;
• Hitler's slaughter of the Jews in the Holocaust of WW2;
• Pol Pot's genocide;
• Idi Amin's mass slaughter;
• The 50-year-old man charged with murder after ramming a house.

I would never want to worship such a God, let alone describe him as 'more gloriously comforting' in a mess of a world.

Seems to me you are confusing God's sovereignty with the means God allows for wickedness to happen in our world.

Oz

 

[adhidarmawijaya]

Before the foundation of the world God had a plan that there should be men living in the world who could glorify Him.
Isa43:7 They are my own people, and I created them to bring me glory."
This plan He wrote in the book of life ( many names inside this book ).
The only way men can glorify Him is: " these men should be saved from death by His Grace only ( men could not reach their salvation by their own effort )" so this premise (salvation is only by God's Grace) requires a condition where all the babies which are born in the world entirely in spiritually dead ( the names in the book of life/His plan to be created are included) .
note: not all the babies are His creations only them who are listed in the book of life /born of God John1:12-13/ who have ears Rev 3:6 , because there many among them are born of flesh John1:12-13/not listed in the book of life before the foundation of the world Rev13:8 Rev17:8 /have no ears Rev3:6 .
Eph1:4 Even before the world was made, God had already chosen us to be his through our union with Christ/(being saved by His Grace only), so that we would be holy and without fault before him. Because of his love.
So falling to spiritually dead is a necessity, in order God's Grace could be bestowed ( also we can ponder : why should God create Adam and Eve at the beginning ?, why not all the names in the book of life altogether ? ) ----> finally men can glorify Him.

Did God create the sins ?.
Although implicit God gave the possibility where sin could happen , but explicitly not.
because in that time the sources of sins (satan ) had been exist , God only use them .
If A and E being cheated in the 5th days , it meant 4 days before that days they were still glorious ( although satan might cheate them from the frist day cause this was satan main job) , so the glorious condition as 4 days before the fifth days also could be happened in the fifth days , and also could be happened in the Nth days , where N unlimited number , so this is the proof that God could not be accused as the sin creator.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Interesting responses.

So what do you all say is the first cause or ultimate source of everything if not God?

Obviously all of creation came from God. He created all the elements, etc. So God is the Source of all things physical. God didn't create cars, man did. But God created all the elements that go into the creation of cars.

But the real issue here is sin, of course. To say that God is the ultimate source of sin just isn't Biblically based. If so, please provide it.

By the way - I can't think of anything more gloriously comforting, as a creature living in this mess of a world, than knowing that God has planned every detail from the beginning to the end of this age.

The mess came from sin, starting with Lucifer, and then Adam. Not God.

Why is it so comforting to know that the mess has its source from God?

Nor can I think of anything more disconcerting than believing that He has not.

I asked these questions in post #3:
Why it is so difficult to accept the reality that God created creatures with freedom to choose? Why or how is that any less of a "glorious concept"?

Maybe a better question is why does the idea of a God given ability to choose freely so threatening?

 

[Steeno7]

Non Reformed Christians here in the forum would say that the confession got it all wrong in saying that. They say this because sin exists in the world and God cannot in any way be said to be the cause of sin.

The reasoning goes that God's in any way causing sin would be an act of evil.

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

What say you and why?

Could you point us to where the confession states that God is the cause of sin?

 

[Marvin Knox]

So are you saying that there are no secondary causes in your world that harmonise with the sovereignty of God?

Not at all.

I am agreeing with what you so simply and correctly point out.

We and our choices are but "secondary causes".

Secondary causes require (by their very definition) the existence of first causes.

In the case we are discussing that first cause was the creation of creatures to whom He gave free will - knowing full well what they would do with that free will. What they did with it (as God knew full well they would) was to make ill advised choices which result in sin or missing the mark of God's holiness.

In so doing, they birth events which lead to calamity (evil).

Sin (again, by it's very definition) cannot be done by God. He is the standard from which sinners stray. He cannot deny Himself, as the scripture puts it.

Was God the first cause of the September 11, 2001 events,

• The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki;
• Hitler's slaughter of the Jews in the Holocaust of WW2;
• Pol Pot's genocide;
• Idi Amin's mass slaughter;
• The 50-year-old man charged with murder after ramming a house.

Yes.

The examples you gave are examples of the evil brought about through what you yourself call the secondary causes of men's sins.

I would never want to worship such a God, let alone describe him as 'more gloriously comforting' in a mess of a world.

An uncharitable Calvinist would simply say that you worship another God than the one clearly portrayed for us in scripture.

I choose to say what I believe to be the case.

You and I are worshiping the same God. You are simply wrong on some points concerning His attributes and activities.

Seems to me you are confusing God's sovereignty with the means God allows for wickedness to happen in our world.
Oz

Not at all.

God's sovereignty would include the means God allows for wickedness to happen in our world. But I am not conflating the two (nor does the Westminster Confession of Faith).

God's sovereignty in the case we are considering has been displayed most prominently with the fact of His choice to create creatures with free will.

 

[rnmomof7]

Non Reformed Christians here in the forum would say that the confession got it all wrong in saying that. They say this because sin exists in the world and God cannot in any way be said to be the cause of sin.

The reasoning goes that God's in any way causing sin would be an act of evil.

It seems that the idea that God is the first cause or "ultimate source" of all things in this world including sin is repugnant to all but we who are Reformed.

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

What say you and why?

If Adam and Eve had not sinned.. what would man know about God ? They knew God as creator, and friend..

That is a snapshot of who God is.. without sin man would never know the righteousness of God.. His jealousy , His justice, His mercy , His grace , His wrath, His Holiness,His providence , etc..

It is through sin that man knows God most completely ... It is the knowledge of our sin that drives us to our knees

 

[rnmomof7]

Why would one glory in such a belief?

James tells us where sin originates, but that would put a giant hole in Reformed beliefs. So, I see where you have to originate your own thoughts (Isaiah 55:9).

For the exact reason you quoted "9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Could you point us to where the confession states that God is the cause of sin?

III.

I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain WHATSOEVER COMES TO PASS, yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

V.

II. Although, in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first Cause, ALL THINGS come to pass immutably, and infallibly; yet, by the same providence, He orders them to fall out, according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.

IV. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in His providence, that it extends itself even to the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men; and that not by a bare permission, but such as has joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering, and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to His own holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness thereof proceeds only from the creature, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.

VI.

I. Our first parents, being seduced by the subtlety and temptations of Satan, sinned, in eating the forbidden fruit. This, their sin, God was pleased, according to His wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to His own glory.

 

[rnmomof7]

So in the Reformed mindset if that is what they believe then Christ didn't die for the sins of man but died for the sins caused by God. Now the absurdity in that is beyond reproach!

Where did sin come from? Who created sin ?

 

[Marvin Knox]

Why it is so difficult to accept the reality that God created creatures with freedom to choose? Why or how is that any less of a "glorious concept"?

Maybe a better question is why does the idea of a God given ability to choose freely so threatening?

It isn't difficult at all for me to accept. Where would you get such an idea? I have never denied the idea of God giving free will to His creatures.

God's having an exact and comprehensive purpose for what would surely follow is what makes it all so comforting even in the presence of tremendous calamity.

It isn't threatening for me at all to realize that it was not evil but good that God gave the freedom of choice to His creatures knowing full well what the consequences of those choices would be.

What seems to be threatening to some is the fact of God's decree of free will for His creatures.

In fact they seem to believe that God's doing so was an act of evil since it's ultimate result was obviously to be sin.

I do not believe, as many apparently do, that God's giving of the gift of choice, while knowing what the results would be, was an evil act.

I believe that when all is said and done it will be seen to be an tremendous act of good and glory.

 

[Job8]

The Reformed, on the other hand, say that not only is that concept not repugnant - it is in fact a glorious concept.

It is a glorious concept only if one's theology is warped. Since God and Christ HATE INIQUITY (Heb 1:9) it should be clear from Scripture itself that God has nothing whatsoever to do with sin, iniquity and evil. He has allowed these things to exist "for a season", but they will be eventually eradicated from the universe, and will never again rear their ugly heads.

 

[James Is Back]

Where did sin come from? Who created sin ?

It started with satan and then it began on earth from man.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Where did sin come from? Who created sin ?

Did God create the sins ?.
Although implicit God gave the possibility where sin could happen , but explicitly not.................................God could not be accused as the sin creator.

I've taken the liberty to address only this one concept from your post.

Very recently I listened in on a lengthy argument on another thread between a group of Calvinists and a group of Non-Calvinists.

It had to do with the question of the "creation" of sin. The Calvinists were being accused of believing and teaching that God "created" sin - since they held the position that all things were created by God.

I remember thinking at the time just how profoundly ignorant of scripture the entire concept of sin being "created" by anyone was- let alone God.

Sin is not a created thing. Evil is not a created thing.

Sin is the result of a choice made by one of God's creature to whom He has given free choice.

God cannot sin against Himself because He Himself is the perfect standard from which any choice must fall short in order to be called a sinful choice.

Sin, by it's very nature, has to be brought about by the actions of the creature.

Saying that God's sovereign decision to give free will to His creatures is the first cause of all sin is not the same as saying that God is the direct cause of sin since that is a ridiculous concept on the face of it.