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

[Marvin Knox]

It is a glorious concept only if one's theology is warped.

It is not warped theology to believe that God gave the gift of choice to His creatures knowing full well every consequence of that action before He undertook it.

It is indeed a glorious concept to believe that He had a comprehensive plan in mind when He did so.

The resultant evils brought about by the ill advised choices of His creatures were not a surprise to God and He is not merely reacting to them.

He is, on the other hand, interacting with them to bring about some ultimate good.

That's not warped theology. That's Bible theology.

.............................. 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.

Come now!

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.

Well - duhhh.

This is not news. He wrote down the end for us all to see.

The end of this age is not in doubt.

Nor has it been since before God made that decree that His creatures should have free wills.

 

[FreeGrace2]

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.

Giving His creatures freedom to choose either to consent or to rebel does not make God the "first cause" of any of said choices.

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

This would be many Calvinists.

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.

It wasn't. And knowing what the results would be doesn't make God the "first cause" either.

When Lucifer rebelled, he himself was the first cause of rebellion. Let's remember what "cause" means here:
"a person or thing that gives rise to an action, phenomenon, or condition"

Car makers don't "give rise" to car accidents, except when mechanical failures are linked to accidents. Otherwise the cause is inattention by drivers.

Gun makers don't "give rise" to the way in which people use guns. The cause of criminal use of guns is criminal people.

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

Yes, the God given freedom of choice does bring glory to God, whether one "consents and obeys" or "refuses and rebels" (Isa 1:19-20). Because in either choice, God's character is shown. God's love is shown towards those who obey, and God's justice is shown when one rebels.

 

[FreeGrace2]

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.

Amen! 1 John 3:8 says "the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil."

 

[FreeGrace2]

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

Actually, it continued on earth from Satan as well.

But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. 2 Cor 11:3

 

[Marvin Knox]

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

This would be many Calvinists.

That seems to be true in some cases.

What is often the case, however, is that some non-Calvinists misrepresent the view of many Calvinists concerning free will.

At least my position has been misconstrued as can clearly be seen by the early posts here in this thread.

Hopefully some see my position more clearly now even if they happen to lack the wisdom to agree with it.

 

[EmSw]

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

This is entirely against Reformed teachings.

Chapter VI
Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and the Punishment thereof
I. Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty 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.

II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion, with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.

1 Corinthians 2
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[Marvin Knox]

IMO those selected portions of the Westminster Confession of Faith I posted in post number 15 lay out the situation we find ourselves in as sinners pretty well.

They cover all of the theological bases in a manner that is easy to understand.

They present God for what He is - the sinless, sovereign all wise orchestrator of a good and comprehensive plan for the age.

They lay the the blame for sin exactly where it must, by definition, be said to lay.

They reaffirm for us in no uncertain terms that God is holy and not to be blamed for our situation.

Many may object to the terms used by them (and me) such as first cause and ultimate source. I suppose that's understandable to a certain extent.

After things are explained, however, detractors are without excuse as to understanding what is meant. They are dishonest if they try to misrepresent what is meant in the document and my statements.

Feel free to devise a brief comprehensive statement of your own using terms you prefer. Perhaps you can do better than the hundreds of scholars involved in the writing of the Westminster as to how these things come across from scripture.

I'd be interested to see how that looks when you are done.

Make sure you don't skip any statements and concepts from scripture though.

I wouldn't mind it so much if people simply disagreed with the language concerning "first causes and second causes" - so long as the alternative they present covered all of the bases as well as the Westminster does.

It has been my experience here in the forum and elsewhere, however, that people can't - and worse - they won't even try to do better.

They spout some objections to terms like first cause and ultimate source.

They spout some platitudes about free will and such that don't even really disagree in any way with what the Westminster says.

They talk about sin coming from the bad choices of men and all the rest.

They throw out silly charges concerning "warped" theology.

They tell us the obvious things that the Westminster and I already covered in depth concerning the fact that God cannot sin (case in point in post 28 below).

Then when push comes to shove they simply ignore the theological elephants in the room. They continue to whistle through the graveyard and hope that no one notices that they did not address the problems that the Westminster Confession at least had the fortitude to tackle.

Many here will find other shallow theologians who will pat them on the back with a "like" or a thumbs up when they say something similar to what they would be able to offer.

But don't try to convince anyone with any substance that your slogans about free-will make everything alright - because they don't.

They make things worse.

Millions have found the simple statements of the Westminster Confession of Faith to be givers of comfort when one is tempted to wrestle with the deep things of theology.

 

[Butch5]

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?

No, the Scriptures tell us that God is without sin. The one who causes is a sinner thus God cannot be the cause of sin. It's just logical.

 

[Steeno7]

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.

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.

 

[rnmomof7]

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

So Satan CREATED sin...

 

[rnmomof7]

This is entirely against Reformed teachings.

Chapter VI
Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and the Punishment thereof
I. Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty 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.

II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion, with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.

1 Corinthians 2
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

It returns to what is sin ...(an offense against God) ..Can God offend Himself ?


What we see as evil God ordains and means for our good..

The word "author" is interesting ... because it indicates the one that writes something ...much like God authored the scriptures without actually writing them

Did God order them most foul sin that has ever come to pass ? The crucification ofJesus .

God ordained the fall of Satan, He threw him to the earth where he ordained the fall of Adam .

Scripture is replete with what WE would call sin ...but events that were ordained by God..

God can not sin..or "author" something that offends Him ...

God was not taken by surprise by the revolt in heaven or the fall of man .. this was always a part of HIS plan not his reaction to unseen events ..

What man means for evil God intends for good..

He is the absolute first cause of everything ...

 

[rnmomof7]

No, the Scriptures tell us that God is without sin. The one who causes is a sinner thus God cannot be the cause of sin. It's just logical.

sin1
sin/
noun

1. 1.
   an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.
   "a sin in the eyes of God"
   
   
   God can not "offend Himself " ...He can not "sin" becauseHe can not "offend" Himself..

 

[rnmomof7]

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.

Funny with your screen name... from Job we learn that satan only has the power that God allows him

God is the God of Satan as well.. Satan is a tool in the hand of God

 

[rnmomof7]

This is entirely against Reformed teachings.

Chapter VI
Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and the Punishment thereof
I. Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty 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.

II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion, with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.

1 Corinthians 2
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Can Satan act outside the will of God ?

 

[Marvin Knox]

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.

Excellent reproduction of the words from the WCF.

Pretty well covers it doesn't it?

God has ordained whatsoever comes to pass and He did it in such a way that He cannot be said to be the author of sin.

Who could argue with that?

And your point?

I hope it isn't just to say that God is not the author of sin. That's been said many times here by Calvinist and non Calvinists alike.

It's been agreed on by Reformed theologians for centuries including me.

It is also agreed on by almost all non Reformed theologians as well.

Simply repeating the obvious doesn't add anything to the conversation IMO.

 

[EmSw]

Excellent reproduction of the words from the WCF.

Pretty well covers it doesn't it?

God has ordained whatsoever comes to pass and He did it in such a way that He cannot be said to be the author of sin.

Who could argue with that?

And just what are your thoughts on how He did it in such a way?

Just saying He cannot be the author of sin does not make it so.

Many of us have been waiting for scriptural support for such a claim, yet none has come forth. It would be easy for us to follow if you gave passages which support such an idea. Most of us do not put our faith, nor our logic, in the WCF, as some do.

Let me ask, if God did NOT ordain sin to come to pass, would there be sin in the world?

 

[Butch5]

sin1
sin/
noun

1. 1.
   an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.
   "a sin in the eyes of God"
   
   
   God can not "offend Himself " ...He can not "sin" becauseHe can not "offend" Himself..

That statement is arbitrary. Is that just your opinion or can you supply some evidence to support it?

 

[EmSw]

Can Satan act outside the will of God ?

Is the will of God to sin or not sin?

 

[adhidarmawijaya]

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.

God's creature who have free will just only angels , where satan came from.
I said : "in that time the sources of sins (satan ) had been exist".
A and E had only positive will ( obedient etc ), they had no negative will ( rebel etc ), so they should be cheated first before their fallen ( so there should be satan in Eden as the cheating agent , If A and E had free will they did not need to wait until being cheated for eating the forbidden fruit or satan did not need to be there) , in their glorious state they could not discern the difference between bad from good this evidence told us further that they had no negative will.
After their fallen they be come the spiritually dead creature , means men only have negative will ( Rom3:10-12 ) , so in order to not eating the fruit of the tree of life intentionally they should be driven out from Eden.

 

[Job8]

It is not warped theology to believe that God gave the gift of choice to His creatures knowing full well every consequence of that action before He undertook it.

It is a stretch to take the free will of men and angels and then make God responsible for their sins and iniquities. The Bible makes it crystal clear that sinful choices come under God's righteous judgement immediately (Gen 2:16,17; Jn 3:36). Were it not for the grace of God, and the Finished Work of Christ, all humanity would join the Devil and his angels in the Lake of Fire (which was created specifically for them). God's foreknowledge and omniscience do not automatically make Him responsible for evil. Indeed sin and evil arouse His wrath.