Original Sin and James 1:13,14

[Received]

The scriptures state that God cannot be tempted, nor can He, being holy, tempt anyone to sin (James 1:13). Furthermore, it claims that man is tempted when he is brought away by his own lusts and enticed. But again, at the beginning of the epistle, it states that we should rejoice in our trials (1:2). This, of course, is not contradictory, but is the case of the same Greek word used differently in different contexts. Which brings me to the next point. God placed the tree of good and evil in the garden of evil. Now, we know that God cannot tempt, but He can test, and to such He does not intentionally, but by leaving evil to its own course of action. A test merely draws out the nobility of a person – it is what one needs in order to pertain perfection (at least that’s what we’re told by the pulpit). However, what is difficult is the fact that the bible states that man is drawn away by his own lusts and is enticed when he is tempted, not tested. For, to be tempted is to fail the test and have faith not in God, but in yourself. But with the tree placed by God, and the perfection of man – which implies no lusts that are ruling in his body that he can be enticed by – this leaves no reason for God to indeed ‘test’ man, for he cannot be tested unless there is the possibility of temptation. Man was perfect – as the scriptures claim, created upright, only then to seek out new schemes (Ecclesiastes 7:29). Only does the entrance of Satan, disguised as the serpent, make it even slightly possible for man to be externally tested, but not tempted, for he is, as said above, without lust to be enticed by. Satan tricks Eve into believing she needed more to be worthy of God, when indeed she was already at the limit of perfection, for when the perfect comes, that which is partial is cast away…knowledge shall vanish away (1 Corinthians 13:8). Eve acts upon the test and doubts. It must be known that she does not find evil in her own character, but merely finds the possibility of such in her mind, which is then free to choose the good and the evil, choosing the latter not because of an understanding of it (as it is with being drawn away by one’s own lusts), but because of the only thing her perfect mind was capable of producing: doubt. It leaves me to believe, then, that it was impossible for God to merely “ordain” or willfully cause Satan to be as he is. For by so doing, God is using a perfect being instrumentally, and thus violating his free will, and eventually causing him to suffer the ultimate penalty (Revelation 20:11). Furthermore, He would be tempting Eve through such an action, by placing a being He purposely caused to fall, for the mere purpose of testing a human being. It must be realized that Satan fell on his own accord, by brewing on his own pride, and we know that a person cannot be tempted to pride, and it was his own lusts that led him to the garden – to perfection. How he reached such a state of pride without any sort of temptation is uncertain; but we must trust that God did not intend for him to suffer. Those who also claim that God planned intentionally that man should fall by making Satan enter the scene as an instrument are simply wrong. God cannot tempt. Satan fell before man was created (or, by God’s foreknowledge, some time shortly after), which gave God the possibility of creating perfect man without forcing something upon Lucifer. It was then seen by God as grounds to test man – not a forced temptation. We must not claim that the loss of perfection is possible once we are in the regeneration of all things, for the thought of it would destroy the very reason God kept from destroying us as we were, and not giving us the salvation that came only from Christ – “…the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs until now.” (Romans 8:21,22). It might even be said that Eve did not know the full value of her perfection come the testing Satan, which led to her self-imposed act on doubt, for she may have been in a state of full potential – of everything that was meant for man in a single human being. Some have claimed, such as John Hick, that God created man in His image, and not in His full likeness, but according to it (Genesis 1:26), as James said, “in the similitude of God” (James 3:9). This would indeed leave room for doubt, for God cannot doubt; nor is man omnipresent, needing a body. Furthermore, if God were to create another in His perfect likeness, He would create another Him, which is an impossibility, for, being omnipresent and eternal, it would be impossible, and futile, for God to do such an act. It leaves me to conclude that man had no other choice but to be created with the likelihood of doubt, or that he could not have been created at all, for man, being different but of more value than the angels, is the only step lower that God could have chosen to create, given His character. This should make us in awe at our awesome workmanship; as the Psalmist said, “I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made!” (Psalm 139:14). Also, though God did not intend for evil to happen (for again, He cannot intend evil, being good), He did indeed create us perfectly, and we had the ultimate opportunity of staying perfect. Perfection, in this context, must be realized not to be absolute perfection – without free will for evil, as God does not have. I would seriously doubt that Adam and Eve were ones to have curiosity, except after their doubt, of which came with the testing of Satan. It must also be noted that it wasn’t the doubt itself that was the sin, but the disobedience against God’s original word (“of every tree you may eat except this one”), for we know that doubt does not cause the loss of communion with Him, but the action itself that we know subjectively and objectively to be sinful.

So we conclude then, with the understanding that God did not create the world to condemn it, but it was through a creation with the possibility of doubt that He could have creatures who freely love Him, and for the simple fact that creating a being without doubt would be equivalent to creating another Himself, which is, being infinite, eternal, omnipotent, omniscience, and omnipresent, both futile and impossible. When man creates something, it is something that is not as valuable as himself (from the ultimate, divine standard). God creating man may very well have been a part of creative love and art, for He did declare man alone as “very good”. God did not intend Satan to fall, but allowed such an incident for Eve’s test, of which led to her doubt, and finally to her disobedience. Doubt in itself is amoral; that is, it is neither good nor bad, but a necessity for a given creation, of which God used for reasons stated above. And we must also realize that although God by no means uses evil for the direct temptation of His creation, He does ordain such (Ecclesiastes 7:14), and upon reaching a redeemed person, would register immediately as a trial, which would leave it up to his free will to reject it and trust God, thus gaining perseverance (James 1:3) or accept it and be tempted into sin (1:14).

One might finally ask why God would ever create a world that He knew would fall. Answers here are limited, if not non-existent because of sin-stained rationality on behalf of humans. Perhaps it was that God, being holy, wanted a solid group of followers to love Him, and after the fall of Satan and a third of the angels, He allowed such events to happen – though He did not will sin – that man might eventually be redeemed to love Him in perfection forever, by free and submissive choice – a complete race of gods that were with Him by a propitiation that may not have had effect on the hearts of fallen angels. Perhaps it is only man that can truly love God, and it is angels, though more powerful than man, who are merely servants and worshippers. As you can see, the answers die away with even the contemplation of why. But we must trust our faith and the fact that God cannot tempt, and that our redemption was the work of perfection, though understood only by us only through our imperfection. “For the creation was subject to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope” (Romans 8:20).

 

[seebs]

I have often compared angels to critics who always like your poetry. A critic who doesn't always understand your poetry, but whose appreciation, when it happens, is sincere and unforced, is much more fulfilling.