Cause and Effect?

[Mark Quayle]

I understand create to be an action.
Cause and effect though, is a process involving an action or event, and a result.
So, when I think of someone setting an event and result in motion, I think of determining how everything will be.
I didn't want to be assuming you said or meant something you did not say, so I asked you to explain, so that I could understand you.

Yes. "Create" is an action, with an effect. And you are logically accurate —creating determines the result, the effect, and that, to every smallest detail. This is, to me, rather obvious, when it comes to God creating: What he did in creating, determined every result, but he did so KNOWING every result, which implies INTENDING every result. He created SO THAT the result(s).

I would say that's a different question.
Did God create sin is different to, Did God want sin, and "set the spark that started the fire (sin)"?.
I hope I am not asking difficult questions. If so, please let me know. I think being specific in such discussions is important.
However, at the same time, I don't want to cause any discomfort.

The only discomfort I get is when the wording departs from Scripture, or introduces unscriptural implications. The Bible says that God does not sin, nor does he tempt anyone to sin. So I have to be careful in my descriptions of his causation. The same discomfort shows up when Human conceptions of what God is like and what he does supersede what Scriptures say. It is for this reason that I avoid using the word, or even the notion, of "want", when applied to God. Even when I find, "God wants", in Scriptures, I pretty automatically discard any notion that approaches what it means for us to say, "I want".

"God wanting" cannot logically mean that 'he is unable due to circumstances beyond his control'.

This is a clear answer. I appreciate that.
So, you are saying that God wanted Adam and Eve to join Satan in his rebellion, and plunge the whole human race into misery, and suffering, so that he would have to send his son to earth, to suffer and die a torturous death, for our good.
You are saying God intended that. That's what you believe?

No. I'm not saying "God wanted". I'm saying God intended, and caused. And yes, plunged the whole human race into misery, suffering and frustration, but with limits, as far as that goes. And those to whom he showed mercy, into a completely different mode of suffering, with joy in Christ. Anticipation. Freedom.

Mark Quayle said:
No. They were not ready for the serpent's trickery and lies. But they were prepared precisely for the result of their encounter. God INTENDED that they disobey, for his own purposes, and that, for our own good. If there had been no fall, there would have been only Eden, not knowledge of Good and Evil, and we would have been only intelligent animals.

You didn't refer to any scriptures for this. Thank God.

However, why would God do such a thing, especially since more people will be born? Would God do the same to them, so that there wouldn't have only Eden, and no knowledge of Good and Evil?

Why would God do the hypothetical I posed, of having a continuing Eden without knowledge of Good and Evil? He wouldn't. That was not his purpose in creating. Or did you mean, why would God intend that Adam sin?

How do you attribute goodness to a God who does this, and then in his own words he turns and says to Eve, “What is this that you have done?” - Genesis 3:13

Two ways. One is the plain fact that God is good, yet he did what he did; and the other is the fact that he is necessarily quite a bit beyond our comprehension of "Good".

So, do you believe there will never be an Eden, where people do not taste the ill effects of sin which produces misery and death, so that people experience Good and Evil?

No. That description is not Heaven. Heaven is its own end, and is not there so that people can experience Good and Evil, but is (in part) a result of the fact that people have experienced Good and Evil. Yes, there they will not taste ill effects at all.

So, you don't believe God is responsible for sin; Yet, you think it is what God wanted, and he "set things up" so that there would be sin, on all mankind?
You're not seeking yo confuse me Mark. Are you?

No. I believe he is 'responsible' for the whole matter, causing all that comes to pass, specifically; but I don't like the word 'responsible' there, because people draw implications from it that I never meant. And no, I don't say that is what God "wanted". I don't like the word, 'wanted', there, because people draw implications from it that I never meant. God caused all things to come to pass, intending for there to be sin, so that there would be his redemption of those to whom he chose to show mercy, and the subsequent Body of Christ, Bride of Christ, Dwelling Place of God, Children of God, above even the Angels. Heaven.


Mark Quayle said:
You are right —it IS important. And it seems to me it should not be so difficult to put it into reasonable words. But logic demands it, and Scripture also demonstrates it, that God created and controlled all fact, such that sin did enter the world, and corrupt us. It was no accident.

I do not see it in scripture. Could you show me where you see it, please?

Genesis chapts. 1, 2, 3; John 1; Colossians 1:16-20; Romans 11:36; 2 Corinthians 5:18,19; Romans 5:20 —just for starters. Actually, in my opinion, Scripture is replete with examples, but not everyone sees such the way I do.

I get it Mark. I ask questions, but I do pay attention to the answer.
That's why I ask questions.

You're right about that though. Getting people to swallow a pill like that, they do need more than water.
Joking aside, the command at Matthew 22:37 “‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’, is not one we carry out perfunctory - like a robot.

Of course not! We are not robots at all, but puppetry is not the necessary conclusion of the notion that God controls everything. Another human notion that is not necessary, to pair with that one, is that the command implies the ability to obey. It's another hard pill to swallow, though I consider it the same pill, is that God is altogether just to create something for the purpose of its damnation, if he so chooses, BECAUSE he is God. I don't claim he does that alone —he creates them for many other things, among which is spoken of in Romans 9, for his own glory and to show the depth of his mercy to those he redeems.

But for the 'spiritual indigestion' there is comfort, in that he is just. The fact that he will do with anyone according to what they deserve should give dimension to our notions of his condemnation of them. He is only precise, and thorough.

So, understanding - getting to know God - is very important. John 17:3
Thus, we want to be sure we are being told the truth about God. Jesus said as much.

Satan is a liar, Jesus said - John 8:44. So he will be certain to paint a very ugly picture of God. One that doesn't represent God at all.
It's understandable, if people are not drawn to a God who does not demonstrate that he is indeed Good.

Logic says that God made and controls everything. Scripture does too.

There's much more to say, but I have to go to work, now. More later, if you like.

 

[CoreyD]

Yes. "Create" is an action, with an effect. And you are logically accurate —creating determines the result, the effect, and that, to every smallest detail. This is, to me, rather obvious, when it comes to God creating: What he did in creating, determined every result, but he did so KNOWING every result, which implies INTENDING every result. He created SO THAT the result(s).

Perhaps an example may help.
Let's say, God creates a ball. God creates a football field, and places the ball in the center, of the field.
Can you continue from there. How does creating these things, determine the effects, or result?
Maybe a goal-bar or two.

The only discomfort I get is when the wording departs from Scripture, or introduces unscriptural implications. The Bible says that God does not sin, nor does he tempt anyone to sin. So I have to be careful in my descriptions of his causation. The same discomfort shows up when Human conceptions of what God is like and what he does supersede what Scriptures say. It is for this reason that I avoid using the word, or even the notion, of "want", when applied to God. Even when I find, "God wants", in Scriptures, I pretty automatically discard any notion that approaches what it means for us to say, "I want".

"God wanting" cannot logically mean that 'he is unable due to circumstances beyond his control'.

No. I'm not saying "God wanted". I'm saying God intended, and caused. And yes, plunged the whole human race into misery, suffering and frustration, but with limits, as far as that goes. And those to whom he showed mercy, into a completely different mode of suffering, with joy in Christ. Anticipation. Freedom.

Mark Quayle said:
No. They were not ready for the serpent's trickery and lies. But they were prepared precisely for the result of their encounter. God INTENDED that they disobey, for his own purposes, and that, for our own good. If there had been no fall, there would have been only Eden, not knowledge of Good and Evil, and we would have been only intelligent animals.

I understand the use of the word purpose.
The use of the word 'will, as in the case of "God's will"', is the same as want.
So, I don't think we disagree on the basis of the use of words. It's not an issue.

Why would God do the hypothetical I posed, of having a continuing Eden without knowledge of Good and Evil? He wouldn't. That was not his purpose in creating. Or did you mean, why would God intend that Adam sin?

You said, God INTENDED that they disobey, for his own purposes, and that, for our own good. If there had been no fall, there would have been only Eden, not knowledge of Good and Evil, and we would have been only intelligent animals.

So, what i am asking, is, since more people will be born in the future, would God do the same to them - do something intended for them to fall, so that there wouldn't have only Eden, and no knowledge of Good and Evil?

Two ways. One is the plain fact that God is good, yet he did what he did; and the other is the fact that he is necessarily quite a bit beyond our comprehension of "Good".

That's hard for me to understand, because, if my understanding of good, is not God's, I have no understanding of what is good, so II would not be able to attribute goodness to God.
It would be like saying that what I think is evil, or unjust, is really good, but I don't understand it.

I hope I am not confusing you here, but I do believe God is good, which is why, intending for Adam and Eve to sin, and setting things up for that to happen, is not compatible with God's goodness. I believe we should be able to differentiate.

No. That description is not Heaven. Heaven is its own end, and is not there so that people can experience Good and Evil, but is (in part) a result of the fact that people have experienced Good and Evil. Yes, there they will not taste ill effects at all.

From reading the bible, I don't find the Bible describes heaven as the place of enjoying eternal life for all mankind.
Do you think this scripture is describing heaven? Isaiah 11:6-9

I think, God's purpose is to have the earth filled with righteous people, living in peace with all life - including animal. Hence, why he placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and told then to multiply and fill the earth, and take care of it.
Earth, then was to be man's eternal home. God did not intend for man to be in misery due to sin.
Rather, God intended for what he will fulfill, in the future. Revelation 21:3, 4

These are promises of God, which he makes in the Bible. Psalm 37:11, 29; Proverbs 2:21,22;
All of this was to fulfill the promise God made to Abraham, when revealing his purpose for the see that would come. Genesis 22:18; Ephesians 1:9,10

Do these scriptures not reveal God has a purpose for the earth?
Is that not his purpose for creating the earth, in the beginning? Isaiah 45:18; Psalm 115:16

No. I believe he is 'responsible' for the whole matter, causing all that comes to pass, specifically; but I don't like the word 'responsible' there, because people draw implications from it that I never meant. And no, I don't say that is what God "wanted". I don't like the word, 'wanted', there, because people draw implications from it that I never meant. God caused all things to come to pass, intending for there to be sin, so that there would be his redemption of those to whom he chose to show mercy, and the subsequent Body of Christ, Bride of Christ, Dwelling Place of God, Children of God, above even the Angels. Heaven.

Just letting you know, I understand you clearly.
I also want to let you know, I can see you have put effort into studying this, and that is commendable.
The causing and intending of sin though, that is the part I hope we can consider from a scriptural perspective, and see if we can hopefully come to a conclusion, on whether this is true, or not.
I do fully understand you though.

Mark Quayle said:
You are right —it IS important. And it seems to me it should not be so difficult to put it into reasonable words. But logic demands it, and Scripture also demonstrates it, that God created and controlled all fact, such that sin did enter the world, and corrupt us. It was no accident.

Genesis chapts. 1, 2, 3; John 1; Colossians 1:16-20; Romans 11:36; 2 Corinthians 5:18,19; Romans 5:20 —just for starters. Actually, in my opinion, Scripture is replete with examples, but not everyone sees such the way I do.

Can you be more specific?
Asking me to read Genesis 1-3 will not bring me to see what you see.
So perhaps, you can start with showing me specific expressions in Genesis 1-3, and John 1 that says God created and controlled all fact, such that sin did enter the world, and corrupt us.

Can you also, explain, please, how Colossians 1:16-20 shows that God created and controlled all fact, such that sin did enter the world, and corrupt us. Or where, since I don't read anything hinting this.

Romans 11:36 - from him and by him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever.
Are you saying that all things here, mean that rape of little children are from God?
I used that to show that it's not reasonable to use that scripture to support the belief that whatever takes place is what God created and controlled.

What part are you using from 2 Corinthians 5:18,19, and can you explain? Walk me through it, please. That's what it means to explain something.
If you explain the connection between what you said, and Romans 5:20, I'd be most grateful. I'm not seeing the connection.

You are right, not all see it the way you do, but I really want to see what you say. If I see it, then I can say, at least there is scriptural basis.

Of course not! We are not robots at all, but puppetry is not the necessary conclusion of the notion that God controls everything. Another human notion that is not necessary, to pair with that one, is that the command implies the ability to obey. It's another hard pill to swallow, though I consider it the same pill, is that God is altogether just to create something for the purpose of its damnation, if he so chooses, BECAUSE he is God. I don't claim he does that alone —he creates them for many other things, among which is spoken of in Romans 9, for his own glory and to show the depth of his mercy to those he redeems.

Still, God requires that we love him.
Saying that God can do whatever, because he is God, is not going to encourage, or motivate someone to love God.
Love of come comes from knowing his personality, and qualities - that God is good. David sang, "Taste and see that the LORD is good; How blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him!" - Psalms 34:8

It's something one has to see, in order to know that God is indeed good. they don't just believe that god is good, regardless of what he does.
I know this is not what you are saying, but I think that's important to mention, since some do think this.
To create something for the purpose of its damnation, is not considered good, to many people, including myself.
I don't see that as good, coming from a perfect creature. Maybe a flawed individual.

But for the 'spiritual indigestion' there is comfort, in that he is just. The fact that he will do with anyone according to what they deserve should give dimension to our notions of his condemnation of them. He is only precise, and thorough.

Justice involves doing what is fair, and right. Which is what God does.
Hence why it's compatible with God created Adam and Eve to live, in his family, and a son and daughter, and bring into being other sons and daughters as part of God's united family.
The firstborn son - the one who said, "I always do what pleases the father.", and of whom the father said, "I am well pleased with him." shows that God wanted - intended - for his children to be like Jesus, and have his approval.
This is what we read in all the scriptures.
Proverbs 27:11 - Be wise, my son, and make my heart glad, So that I may reply to one who taunts me.

Why would God say these things, if God intended for his children to sin?

Logic says that God made and controls everything.

Not everyone agrees that's logical, so are you claiming to be the logical one, or claiming that everyone disagreeing with you are illogical?

Scripture does too.

From my reading of scripture, I have not seen that to be true.
However, I do see this.
We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. 1 John 5:19
You would agree that's what scripture says. That's truth, you would agree?

There's much more to say, but I have to go to work, now. More later, if you like.

Pleasure hearing you. Sure. I look forward to hearing you, and your walkthroughs - explanations.
Hope you enjoy your work.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Perhaps an example may help.
Let's say, God creates a ball. God creates a football field, and places the ball in the center, of the field.
Can you continue from there. How does creating these things, determine the effects, or result?
Maybe a goal-bar or two.

God also created the laws of physics by which the game is able to operate. He also created the players, and caused every circumstance of their being and behavior, and, in fact, upheld the very existence of the players and the field and the physics, by his own power.

Before God created, (causing everything else), there was nothing but God (aka, "First Cause", or "The Uncaused Causer"). THEREFORE, everything else but God himself, is a RESULT of Cause.

I understand the use of the word purpose.
The use of the word 'will, as in the case of "God's will"', is the same as want.
So, I don't think we disagree on the basis of the use of words. It's not an issue.

No, "God's will" is not the same as want. God has a will we refer to as God's command, but that command is pretty obviously not the same as his plan (or 'decree'), which is also, "God's will". What God commands, some will come to pass, and some will be disobeyed. But what he decreed shall come to pass, shall indeed come to pass, though we don't know what it is.

You said, God INTENDED that they disobey, for his own purposes, and that, for our own good. If there had been no fall, there would have been only Eden, not knowledge of Good and Evil, and we would have been only intelligent animals.

So, what i am asking, is, since more people will be born in the future, would God do the same to them - do something intended for them to fall, so that there wouldn't have only Eden, and no knowledge of Good and Evil?

Why would he do the same to them? They are already fallen creatures by being Adam's seed. John 3:18 "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

Now if you only mean to go by your "suppose that", the supposition falls flat, and so the reasoning resulting from it is bogus. That we can come up with a string of words that to us seem to stand for something, doesn't mean that they are of any substance.

That's hard for me to understand, because, if my understanding of good, is not God's, I have no understanding of what is good, so II would not be able to attribute goodness to God.
It would be like saying that what I think is evil, or unjust, is really good, but I don't understand it.

You seem to me to be doing two things there, that give you this result. 1. One is that you go to extremes. To say that we are not replete with knowledge of God's point of view concerning good, is not to say that we know nothing about it. We certainly know enough about it that we are without excuse. But to have God's understanding of 'Good' is to know God completely, and we all have a long way to go, there.

2. The other is like the first, in that you seem to want to put us on God's level, or bring him down to ours. Let me try to present a narrative of sorts. As all Christians agree, God is love, and God is good. Thus, all his works are good. He created, from nothing, all things, and we know that is was good of him to do so, and done from his love. But you want to categorize his good works as morally good from OUR judgement —as though for us to do, is judged the same as for him to do. Moral badness is to oppose, to disobey, to rebel against God. Moral goodness is to follow him. It is not because the things he does are good, that God is good, but rather, what God does is good because God does them. God does not sin, but it is good that sin has come about, because that is a cause of Christ's death on the Cross in our place. There is no moral standard to which God and moral agents must be measured. He is the moral standard, to which we are measured.

I hope I am not confusing you here, but I do believe God is good, which is why, intending for Adam and Eve to sin, and setting things up for that to happen, is not compatible with God's goodness. I believe we should be able to differentiate.

Here is a rather ironic difference between your view and mine:

You want the details of what he has caused to be without moral fault. But you want the control of those details to be irrelevant to his overall plan. You want him to accomplish what he has decided to accomplish in the long term, to be done in the long term, by reacting to the uncontrolled deviations along the way to set things back on course. You want sin to be something he did not anticipate when he made us.

I see the details as the means by which his long-term plan is accomplished. And that, to include all the wrongdoing and suffering that come in this life.

From reading the bible, I don't find the Bible describes heaven as the place of enjoying eternal life for all mankind.
Do you think this scripture is describing heaven? Isaiah 11:6-9

All mankind? Of course not! I'm not saying all mankind will be there.

Yes, I like to think Isaiah 11:6-9 is describing heaven.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I think, God's purpose is to have the earth filled with righteous people, living in peace with all life - including animal. Hence, why he placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and told then to multiply and fill the earth, and take care of it.
Earth, then was to be man's eternal home. God did not intend for man to be in misery due to sin.
Rather, God intended for what he will fulfill, in the future. Revelation 21:3, 4

These are promises of God, which he makes in the Bible. Psalm 37:11, 29; Proverbs 2:21,22;
All of this was to fulfill the promise God made to Abraham, when revealing his purpose for the see that would come. Genesis 22:18; Ephesians 1:9,10

Do these scriptures not reveal God has a purpose for the earth?
Is that not his purpose for creating the earth, in the beginning? Isaiah 45:18; Psalm 115:16

If that was his purpose for the earth in the beginning, and that is what he will bring about, then why go with the notion that this is plan B, as though he had intended that Adam and Even not sin?

Just letting you know, I understand you clearly.
I also want to let you know, I can see you have put effort into studying this, and that is commendable.
The causing and intending of sin though, that is the part I hope we can consider from a scriptural perspective, and see if we can hopefully come to a conclusion, on whether this is true, or not.
I do fully understand you though.

Frankly, no —nobody fully understand anyone else. Too much rides on preconceptions that are not shared.

But I have no problem studying the question from a scriptural perspective, but it is important to understand that Scripture does not go beyond logic. They both go together. When scripture seems to transcend logic, it is because we don't know Scripture, or because we don't know what Scripture means, or because our logic preconceives things, presumes 'facts not quite in evidence'. The fact that we don't understand something logically does not mean it is not logical.

Can you be more specific?
Asking me to read Genesis 1-3 will not bring me to see what you see.
So perhaps, you can start with showing me specific expressions in Genesis 1-3, and John 1 that says God created and controlled all fact, such that sin did enter the world, and corrupt us.

The logic is simple. In the beginning, God. Only God. Not only did God start the ball rolling, but he in fact was before all other fact. On further narrative, he could have kept the serpent away from Even. After all, didn't he know what would happen?

John 1 "All things were made by him..." "...the world was made through him."

Can you also, explain, please, how Colossians 1:16-20 shows that God created and controlled all fact, such that sin did enter the world, and corrupt us. Or where, since I don't read anything hinting this.

"16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." How, if God created all things, is it possible for mere chance, or even Satan-created sin, able to enter the world, un-caused by God? Is Satan another First Cause, even though God caused him? Are we? There can be only one first cause.

Romans 11:36 - from him and by him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever.
Are you saying that all things here, mean that rape of little children are from God?

I don't think you see the extreme nature of God's ownership of his creation. He is no resident within it, bound by its principles, like we are. He has absolute authority and right to do as he will, and it not be sin for him to do it. If the rape of a child is what is necessary for God to produce the perfect and glorious Bride of Christ, and Dwelling Place of God, he will cause it to come to pass.

Notice that Joseph says to his brothers, that what they had done to Joseph, that they "indeed intended it for evil, but God intended it for good."

I used that to show that it's not reasonable to use that scripture to support the belief that whatever takes place is what God created and controlled.

How not?

What part are you using from 2 Corinthians 5:18,19, and can you explain? Walk me through it, please. That's what it means to explain something.

Particularly the "All things are of God", though the rest of it is indicative to my thinking. And no, "all things are of God" does not mean that God himself commanded, approved of sin, nor that he tempted anyone, when he decreed that everything come to pass as it has.

If you explain the connection between what you said, and Romans 5:20, I'd be most grateful. I'm not seeing the connection.

"Where sin increased, grace increased all the more." seems rather obvious to me. If there had been no sin, there would have been no grace.

 

[Mark Quayle]

You are right, not all see it the way you do, but I really want to see what you say. If I see it, then I can say, at least there is scriptural basis.

Still, God requires that we love him.
Saying that God can do whatever, because he is God, is not going to encourage, or motivate someone to love God.
Love of come comes from knowing his personality, and qualities - that God is good. David sang, "Taste and see that the LORD is good; How blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him!" - Psalms 34:8

It's something one has to see, in order to know that God is indeed good. they don't just believe that god is good, regardless of what he does.
I know this is not what you are saying, but I think that's important to mention, since some do think this.
To create something for the purpose of its damnation, is not considered good, to many people, including myself.
I don't see that as good, coming from a perfect creature. Maybe a flawed individual.

God uses the truth to attract some and to repel others.

Justice involves doing what is fair, and right. Which is what God does.
Hence why it's compatible with God created Adam and Eve to live, in his family, and a son and daughter, and bring into being other sons and daughters as part of God's united family.
The firstborn son - the one who said, "I always do what pleases the father.", and of whom the father said, "I am well pleased with him." shows that God wanted - intended - for his children to be like Jesus, and have his approval.
This is what we read in all the scriptures.
Proverbs 27:11 - Be wise, my son, and make my heart glad, So that I may reply to one who taunts me.

Why would God say these things, if God intended for his children to sin?

He did not command anyone to sin. He "decreed" that it should happen.

Not everyone agrees that's logical, so are you claiming to be the logical one, or claiming that everyone disagreeing with you are illogical?

Logic can be very good, but based on false presuppositions, and so arrive at false conclusions. GK Chesterton said something to the effect that a madman is one of the most logical people there are. If one assumes that they know what God's love is and does; and that God's decree and man's choice are mutually exclusive; and that if God decrees all fact, then everything is thereafter automatic; and that the command implies the ability to obey; and that if God is not evil then nothing he does can bring about evil, nor can he intend that evil happen; and....it goes on and on. Actually, all those fit one huge false assumption —that man operates on God's level, as though he, like them is only a resident of the cosmos, the omni, the 'what is', "brute fact", and subject to it, instead of being not only the master of it all, but the creator of it, who made it all ON PURPOSE. God is the default, the only "brute fact".

Do you really believe that anything can happen spontaneously? Only God is spontaneous.

From my reading of scripture, I have not seen that to be true.
However, I do see this.
We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. 1 John 5:19
You would agree that's what scripture says. That's truth, you would agree?

Sure! So where did the evil one get that power? Does that power mean that God does not control the evil one? Does that power mean that God is not using the evil one in every motion of the evil one's mind and act, for God's own purposes?

 

[CoreyD]

God also created the laws of physics by which the game is able to operate. He also created the players, and caused every circumstance of their being and behavior, and, in fact, upheld the very existence of the players and the field and the physics, by his own power.

Mark. You will have to show me where in the Bible God created the players to kick the ball in any one direction. In other words, where in the Bible does it say God program Adam and Eve to eat the fruit?
I'll take this one step of the way, so that we don't make claims and run with them when we have no facts to back such claims.
PAUSED Waiting for the scripture(s)

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark. You will have to show me where in the Bible God created the players to kick the ball in any one direction. In other words, where in the Bible does it say God program Adam and Eve to eat the fruit?
I'll take this one step of the way, so that we don't make claims and run with them when we have no facts to back such claims.
PAUSED Waiting for the scripture(s)

Let me see if I'm hearing you right. Are you saying God did not create the players?

Where did this notion of programming come in? Causing something to surely happen is not programming. I've been saying all along, that God's decree most often is accomplished by the mundane, the everyday, the choices we make, the principles by which life operates, etc.. Does he cause those choices? —of course he does. It's plain logic, if God is First Cause and knew every result of his creating. He not only caused those choices, but the facts imply that he INTENDED those choices.

I'll show you scriptures when you show me a fair representation of what I believe, to ask for the supporting scriptures.

 

[CoreyD]

Let me see if I'm hearing you right. Are you saying God did not create the players?

No. That's not what I said.

Where did this notion of programming come in? Causing something to surely happen is not programming. I've been saying all along, that God's decree most often is accomplished by the mundane, the everyday, the choices we make, the principles by which life operates, etc.. Does he cause those choices? —of course he does. It's plain logic, if God is First Cause and knew every result of his creating. He not only caused those choices, but the facts imply that he INTENDED those choices.

I'll show you scriptures when you show me a fair representation of what I believe, to ask for the supporting scriptures.

You said, He also created the players, and caused every circumstance of their being and behavior, and, in fact, upheld the very existence of the players and the field and the physics, by his own power

Based on that, and everything else you said, the choices Adam made was programed by God. Otherwise, Adam did not need to kick the ball.
That was the reason for my football field. Unless the player kicks the ball, it stays put. Unless some earthquake or cyclone hits the field, and since that's what God intended and controls, according to you, then God moved the ball where he intended for it to go.

Here, you said "Does he cause those choices? —of course he does. It's plain logic"
So, if I am misunderstanding you, I think you need to explain what you have in mind, in words that don't say what I am reading here.

If I misunderstood you, I am sorry. Can you please explain what I misunderstood, and what you really intend to say.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Based on that, and everything else you said, the choices Adam made was programed by God. Otherwise, Adam did not need to kick the ball.
That was the reason for my football field. Unless the player kicks the ball, it stays put. Unless some earthquake or cyclone hits the field, and since that's what God intended and controls, according to you, then God moved the ball where he intended for it to go.

Of course he kicked the ball. Just as God intended that he do. What's the problem? Did he kick the ball of his own choice? Most certainly.

Here, you said "Does he cause those choices? —of course he does. It's plain logic"
So, if I am misunderstanding you, I think you need to explain what you have in mind, in words that don't say what I am reading here.

If I misunderstood you, I am sorry. Can you please explain what I misunderstood, and what you really intend to say.

God began, or caused the beginning of, everything that is (except himself). I have reason to believe that that is not all there is to it —that is, that God having begun everything, also upholds everything, and is currently accomplishing all things—and I could even go the route of demonstrating God's particularity and precision requiring (or, logically implying) control over the smallest particle— but even the fact of deistic causation is enough to argue the point. Nothing can happen that is not caused to happen, except first cause.

But you take that a step further than is warranted, to claim I posit a purely programmed universe, with the mention of choice in particular.

An extreme example: Lucifer did not become Satan by accident. He accomplishes all that God intended concerning him. Does Satan not choose freely to do everything he can in opposition to God, and by his hatred for God? Yes, he is bound to do that. Can you demonstrate that any thing he comes up with is spontaneous, and not a result of all that precedes it? Yet Satan's own will results in every decision he makes.

 

[CoreyD]

Of course he kicked the ball. Just as God intended that he do. What's the problem? Did he kick the ball of his own choice? Most certainly.


God began, or caused the beginning of, everything that is (except himself). I have reason to believe that that is not all there is to it —that is, that God having begun everything, also upholds everything, and is currently accomplishing all things—and I could even go the route of demonstrating God's particularity and precision requiring (or, logically implying) control over the smallest particle— but even the fact of deistic causation is enough to argue the point. Nothing can happen that is not caused to happen, except first cause.

But you take that a step further than is warranted, to claim I posit a purely programmed universe, with the mention of choice in particular.

An extreme example: Lucifer did not become Satan by accident. He accomplishes all that God intended concerning him. Does Satan not choose freely to do everything he can in opposition to God, and by his hatred for God? Yes, he is bound to do that. Can you demonstrate that any thing he comes up with is spontaneous, and not a result of all that precedes it? Yet Satan's own will results in every decision he makes.

If I can't understand you, I am not able to communicate with you. I'm sorry. I really would like to, but your answers aren't very straightforward. I'm sorry. It must be me.

 

[Stephen3141]

I think that you need to define what you mean by "cause" and "effect".

The Oxford Handbook of Causation|Paperback

Causation is a central topic in many areas of philosophy. In metaphysics, philosophers want to know what causation is, and how it is related to laws of nature, probability, action, and freedom of the will. In epistemology, philosophers investigate how causal claims can be inferred from...

www.barnesandnoble.com

I say this, because the Introduction of the above textbook on Causation, asserts that the different
sciences cannot agree on what causality is. (This would come as a SHOCK, to many who work
within the scientific disciplines.)

I would not go on with the discussion, until you can more precisely
try to define what you mean by causality.

 

[public hermit]

God made Lucifer the being that he was, but God intended that Lucifer rebel, and that everything would unfold subsequently to that, precisely in the way that it has unfolded.

St. Augustine seems to agree with you. At least, God did not intend for Lucifer to receive the grace necessary for everlasting blessedness.

"And thus we are driven to believe that the holy angels never existed without a good will or the love of God. But the angels who, though created good, are yet evil now, became so by their own will. And this will was not made evil by their good nature, unless by its voluntary defection from good; for good is not the cause of evil, but a defection from good is. These angels, therefore, either received less of the grace of the divine love than those who persevered in the same; or if both were created equally good, then, while the one fell by their evil will, the others were more abundantly assisted, and attained to that pitch of blessedness at which they became certain they should never fall from it."
City of God XII.9

CHURCH FATHERS: City of God, Book XII (St. Augustine)

Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.

www.newadvent.org

 

[Mark Quayle]

I think that you need to define what you mean by "cause" and "effect".

The Oxford Handbook of Causation|Paperback

Causation is a central topic in many areas of philosophy. In metaphysics, philosophers want to know what causation is, and how it is related to laws of nature, probability, action, and freedom of the will. In epistemology, philosophers investigate how causal claims can be inferred from...

www.barnesandnoble.com

I say this, because the Introduction of the above textbook on Causation, asserts that the different
sciences cannot agree on what causality is. (This would come as a SHOCK, to many who work
within the scientific disciplines.)

I would not go on with the discussion, until you can more precisely
try to define what you mean by causality.

To whom are you speaking, here?

 

[honey badger]

Something interesting- it makes sense to say that God created time, He is outside time, He is not bound by it! However did God also create cause and effect? I am leaning toward yes as God created all things and is not bound by anything, nothing at all! If God created cause and effect He is not bound by it, God is outside of cause and effect! It is pretty wild to think about this!

"We live in the realm of reason that few are willing to look past, where one becomes a captive, ruled over by the law of cause and a/effect."

 

[Stephen3141]

To whom are you speaking, here?

I am speaking to the entire thread.

There are multiple, different assumptions/definitions of what "cause and effect" is.

 

[John Mullally]

.

 

[John Mullally]

An extreme example: Lucifer did not become Satan by accident. He accomplishes all that God intended concerning him. Does Satan not choose freely to do everything he can in opposition to God, and by his hatred for God? Yes, he is bound to do that. Can you demonstrate that any thing he comes up with is spontaneous, and not a result of all that precedes it? Yet Satan's own will results in every decision he makes.

That is not an example, it is conjecture. You assume that everything that happens was planned by God. God is love (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16) and love believes and hopes the best of others (1 Corinthians 13) and thus God did not puppet Satan or any of us to do evil - no matter what Calvin says (see below). God did not plan, decree, or author evil.

“We hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things, –that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, He decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed. Hence we maintain, that by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​

“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11​

​

Per Calvin, God puppets our every action. How then can God, who proclaims himself to be love, condemn anyone for merely doing what God decreed for them to do? Calvinist doctrine relies upon selective (i.e. not obvious) interpretations of particular scriptures and ignores the most plain explanations in scripture that contradict it, such as God desires everyone to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) and God is love. If scripture does not plainly state that God puppets men or devils, why does Calvin say so? Please explain from scripture (as opposed to philosophy and conjecture) as that would be refreshing! Don't underestimate God, as God can be omnipotent and omniscient without scripting everything others do.

 

[Mark Quayle]

God did not plan, decree, or author evil.

And so, per your declaration, it happened by accident? Yes, I know that's not what you said, but it is the logical conclusion.

Per Calvin, God puppets our every action.

And just as I misrepresented what you said, just above, here you misrepresent what Calvin said, and what Calvinism and Reformed Theology say. To you, that is the logical conclusion —but your logic places man on the same scale and plain as God, as far as self-determination. Read the WCF again, concerning God's decree. Here you find mention of HOW it is possible for man not only to decide, but also for his decisions to be real. And THERE is the difference between your misrepresentation and mine.

“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.” (My emphasis)

Established, and thus, caused, by God.

 

[John Mullally]

God did not plan, decree, or author evil.

And so, per your declaration, it happened by accident? Yes, I know that's not what you said, but it is the logical conclusion.

Evil originates from decisions made by God's creation starting with Satan. God tempts no one to do evil per James 1:13.

Per Calvin, God puppets our every action.

And just as I misrepresented what you said, just above, here you misrepresent what Calvin said, and what Calvinism and Reformed Theology say. To you, that is the logical conclusion —but your logic places man on the same scale and plain as God, as far as self-determination. Read the WCF again, concerning God's decree. Here you find mention of HOW it is possible for man not only to decide, but also for his decisions to be real. And THERE is the difference between your misrepresentation and mine.

“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.” (My emphasis)

Established, and thus, caused, by God.

When Calvin stated "the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined", (reference my quotes from Calvin in post 37), Calvin is stating that God governs our every action which if true, establishes God as our puppet master.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Evil originates from decisions made by God's creation starting with Satan. God tempts no one to do evil per James 1:13.


When Calvin stated "the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined", (reference my quotes from Calvin in post 37), Calvin is stating that God governs our every action which if true, establishes God as our puppet master.

The way you interpret Calvin, etc, gives me some understanding of how you interpret scripture —just saying...

Nobody is saying that Satan was not the first, nor that God tempts anyone. Nobody even implied it. You read into what is said.

But, to repeat, your notion that anything can happen but for God's causing it, is logical nonsense, if God is Creator—First Cause.