God And Evil: Problem Solved (Excerpts from Gordon Clark)

[TER]

I'm glad you caught that because I missed it at first. What he's advocating is mysticism, which has no place in Christianity. He directly states that we are created in God's image, and yet he differentiates between man's logic and God's logic. It makes no sense, but you can't expect much more from someone who rejects the necessity of using logic and claims that "evil is a mystery." It's really a sad state of affairs when a Christian falls into the logical trap of mysticism and embraces it. There is no helping someone who has accepted irrationality as a valid starting point.

Let's say that you spent an entire day toiling in the ocean to hunt for oysters. After an exhausting day and full of scrapes and bruises from beating up against the corals, you collected 10 hard earned oysters.

You pack up your stuff and on the way back home you see your brother who asks you what is in the bag, what do you do?

[Sola_Fide]

Looking at this teleologically, yes. From God's perspective, being outside of time, there may perhaps be a fixed future. That does not mean that God is the author of sin.



Very well put. When Adam ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, he got more than he bargained for. Somethings, we simply don't understand yet and are not ready, like Adam, to understand yet. Part of that is the mystery of evil. But in time, better yet, at the end of time, they will be revealed according to the Scriptures.



I believe in foreknowledge and predestination, but I have chosen the wisdom of the Church Fathers and the teachings of the Church which are the more ancient understanding than the interpretation of the Reformers. Why would I forsake the Traditions of the Church when in His great mercy, it is through the Church and the Holy Spirit working in the Church whereby I gain my understanding?

Because the Holy Spirit doesn't speak through a self-appointed group of people in a church. If you believe that, why not become a Mormon?

God speaks to His people directly through the Scriptures.

[TER]

Because the Holy Spirit doesn't speak through a self-appointed group of people in a church. If you believe that, why not become a Mormon?

God speaks to His people directly through the Scriptures.

And what was going on before the Scriptures were written? Was the Holy Spirit impotent?

[Christian Liberty]

Right, but don't you see how permissive will robs God of His glory in predestination? Think about it man. This is the one argument that no Christian can accept.

Wait, are you even saying I'm not a Christian now?

Just go ahead and join Carpenter's church already

[TER]

There is no helping someone who has accepted irrationality as a valid starting point.

Rather, there is no helping someone who has made an idol of themselves and their human mind to be equal to God.

[Sola_Fide]

Looking at this teleologically, yes. From God's perspective, being outside of time, there may perhaps be a fixed future. That does not mean that God is the author of sin.

God "may" know the future? Have you read the book of Revelation? This is not even a question. Also, if there is a fixed future, then the very fact that God created proves predestination.

Very well put. When Adam ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, he got more than he bargained for. Somethings, we simply don't understand yet and are not ready, like Adam, to understand yet. Part of that is the mystery of evil. But in time, better yet, at the end of time, they will be revealed according to the Scriptures.

They already have been revealed in the Scriptures, as Acts 4:27-28 teaches.

[Sola_Fide]

Wait, are you even saying I'm not a Christian now?

Just go ahead and join Carpenter's church already

No, I'm saying that you can't accept the idea that God shares His glory with anything. And I believe you don't. Right?

[TER]

God "may" know the future? Have you read the book of Revelation? This is not even a question. Also, if there is a fixed future, then the very fact that God created proves predestinion.

I didn't say God "may" know the future. Of course He knows the future. I even agreed with you that TELEOLOGICALLY looking at it, the future may be fixed, though I cannot know for sure because I am stuck in this world and my existence is constrained to the limits of earthly existence and my three pound brain.

I am much more interested to know how the Saints survived when there were no written Gospel writings, and how did St. Paul know what to teach his disciples in his missionary work...

[Christian Liberty]

No, I'm saying that you can't accept the idea that God shares His glory with anything.

OK. I misunderstood.

And I believe you don't. Right?

Right. I actually believe that saying God has to actively cause sin may take away some of his glory, which would be part of my objection to it. But yes, of course God doesn't share his glory with anyone.

[TER]

No, I'm saying that you can't accept the idea that God shares His glory with anything. And I believe you don't. Right?

God shares His glory with His children who become co-heirs and adopted sons of God. That is the great news of our salvation.

[Sola_Fide]

God shares His glory with His children who become co-heirs and adopted sons of God. That is the great news of our salvation.

No He doesn't. God glorifies Himself in the salvation of His elect. He does not share His glory with any created thing.

[Sola_Fide]

Right. I actually believe that saying God has to actively cause sin may take away some of his glory,

How?

[TER]

No He doesn't. God glorifies Himself in the salvation of His elect. He does not share His glory with any created thing.

Uh huh. There are so many verses which contradict you, but I will place one (for now).

Romans 8:16

The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.

[TER]

Notice St. Paul is saying "if we suffer with Him", meaning there is a condition required in order that 'we may also be glorified together".

[TER]

Romans 8:18

For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

[Sola_Fide]

Uh huh. There are so many verses which contradict you, but I will place one (for now).

Romans 9:16

The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.

There is no question that the elect are glorified. Their glorification does not come from God sharing His glory with them. Their glorification comes from their salvation, in which God glorifies Himself (Romans 9:23).

[Sola_Fide]

Romans 8:18

For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

Yes, God's glorification of Himself is shown in the salvation of His elect.

[Sola_Fide]

Notice St. Paul is saying "if we suffer with Him", meaning there is a condition required in order that 'we may also be glorified together".

If the condition is suffering in Christ, then you are damned. You haven't suffered enough to merit your salvation.

[TER]

There is no question that the elect are glorified. Their glorification does not come from God sharing His glory with them. Their glorification comes from their salvation, in which God glorifies Himself (Romans 9:23).

It's late Sola. I have to go to bed. Thank you for your courtesy in this debate. Have a good night!

I leave you with the words of Christ on the night He was betrayed:

John 17:20

“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me."

[Christian Liberty]

How?

As I mentioned, even if you assert that God completely hates the non-elect and wants to make them sin so they can suffer, that still doesn't explain why God causes Christians to sin. To do so is for God to give them a command they literally, inherently cannot follow. Again, I get how you can say that God would do that to someone he hates. Its downright absurd to say that God would do that to someone he loves. I would probably assume that God's predestination of sin is based on a combination of deliberate creation of the persons involved (which would effect the sins they are inclined to), control of the situations they are in, and withdrawal of grace (because it is only grace by which any person can be anything less than the worst sinner possible.) But, I accept that I don't know all the answers here, and neither do you. Some of your terminology presumes to know more than it does.

[Sola_Fide]

As I mentioned, even if you assert that God completely hates the non-elect and wants to make them sin so they can suffer, that still doesn't explain why God causes Christians to sin. To do so is for God to give them a command they literally, inherently cannot follow. Again, I get how you can say that God would do that to someone he hates. Its downright absurd to say that God would do that to someone he loves. I would probably assume that God's predestination of sin is based on a combination of deliberate creation of the persons involved (which would effect the sins they are inclined to), control of the situations they are in, and withdrawal of grace (because it is only grace by which any person can be anything less than the worst sinner possible.) But, I accept that I don't know all the answers here, and neither do you. Some of your terminology presumes to know more than it does.

God causes His people to sin for their chastisement in sanctification. Its absolutely not absurd that He would do this for their future glorification. Problem solved. What's the issue now?

You already believe that God causes all things (including the sins of believers), so what's the issue?

[Christian Liberty]

God causes His people to sin for their chastisement in sanctification. Its absolutely not absurd that He would do this for their future glorification. Problem solved. What's the issue now?

You already believe that God causes all things (including the sins of believers), so what's the issue?

I think we just disagree on terminology and semantics. I'm not sure we disagree on anything substantial. I dislike some of your terminology. I may be just being picky

[PaulConventionWV]

I do what Pete said and try to understand these things through the light of Jesus and the whole of Scripture.

Can God cause what appears to be evil in our eyes for a greater purpose rooted in love? Sure. But that doesn't mean He is the author of all things that appear evil to our eyes. You are making false dogma out of a mystery by picking a verse here and a verse there apart from the whole of Scripture.

What about the whole of Scripture is he missing? Just because he quoted it, does that mean he's taking the verses apart from the whole? He's trying to understand these things, just like you. You seem to be insecure about the idea that "our human logic" as you say, would contradict God's word, but if we use the REAL logic, then there is no problem. You want to leave open all kinds of possibilities for some reason, and it seems like it's because you think God's word might not always be logical. I disagree with that.

[PaulConventionWV]

What He predestined was the work of evil for the cause of good. That does not mean God is the author of all evil or that He desires evil.

How can God predestine something without being the author of it? It doesn't necessarily mean he desires it.

[PaulConventionWV]

If I intentionally miss shots and volley over easy ones so that my child could easily score, is not my hand at play?

If I have already predestined my purpose is to let her win the match, does that mean she had no freedom with how she made her swings or how she held the racket?

We do not have freedom with how we "make our swings," but we don't know that, so it doesn't matter. Many people want to cling to the idea of free will like it's some core tenet when it's really not that important. We can still behave as if we have free will although it was already predestined.

[PaulConventionWV]

I have already acknowledged that my example is crude and insufficient, and I agree with you that with regards to God, there are more cosmic realities and implications which my example does not do justice to fully elucidate or explain.

For even if I want to predestine my child to win, whose to say that in the very beginning, while I still have the slight lead, she doesn't twist her ankle and the game is over! What I wanted to predestine, I could not, because I did not know that she would sprain her ankle. But this is not the way with God, Who knew all things from before time and knows all things outside of time, and can take the most wayward shots and evils of men, shots and evil things they have done from their own freedom of action and will, and serve them back in such a way as to ensure that His holy, good, and divine will would manifest.

So you're saying God had knowledge of these things, but He did not predestine them? What source did the knowledge come from?

[PaulConventionWV]

Let's say that you spent an entire day toiling in the ocean to hunt for oysters. After an exhausting day and full of scrapes and bruises from beating against the corals, you collected 10 hard earned oysters.

You pack up your stuff and on the way back home you see your brother who asks you what is in the bag, what do you do?

I tell him there are 10 oysters in the bag...?

[PaulConventionWV]

Rather, there is no helping someone who has made an idol of themselves and their human mind to be equal to God.

I have neither done nor claimed any such thing.

[PaulConventionWV]

OK. I misunderstood.



Right. I actually believe that saying God has to actively cause sin may take away some of his glory, which would be part of my objection to it. But yes, of course God doesn't share his glory with anyone.

Nobody's saying he has to do anything, although it only logically makes sense if he did. I don't think this takes God's glory away.

[Ender]

So you're saying God had knowledge of these things, but He did not predestine them? What source did the knowledge come from?

God lives in the NOW; time is an earthly thing.

And I am one who believes in free will and the beautiful Love of God for all His Creation.