If God, Why Evil? - Sean McDowell
Sean McDowell speaks on the problem of evil and suffering.
Comments
-
I think many miss the point of loving God unconditionally. It's easy to love a god who permits our suffering and empathises with us. But can you love God who sends your affliction? Who destroys your family as he did with Job? And can stop your suffering in a second? It is this kind of love that Christ had and as Paul says, God forms in us.
-
Mitchell,
Thanks, again for the thought. In attempting answer Dave's question with a question; Could it be that "God’s power is limited by human freedom? From creation, the man was given freedom of choice. And without freedom, God’s justice would not be present in history.
Furthermore, precisely because human beings are free, they have the power to change their course and be converted. The destruction of the wicked would put an end to that possibility.
In revealing this paradox, God implies that in the heart of God’s omnipotence lies
also God’s “weakness”. God’s respect for human freedom is given equally to those who have and have not been devout and moral individuals. It is given therefore to Job no less—or more—than to others; God respects him too, and will not destroy him immediately if he acts wrongly or wickedly.Job’s encounter with God happens as the encounter of two freedoms, divine and
human. The first grants and validates the second. Job’s freedom finds expression in his angry rebellion. God’s freedom finds expression in God’s gratuitous love that refuses to be confined in the human religious categories of reward and punishment. Job’s freedom is fulfilled when he meets face-to-face the God in whom he hopes. This is a free God, whose gratuitous love is the foundation of the world and only in light of this love can we grasp the meaning of divine justice. Job would have never discovered how deeply these two freedoms (i.e., divine and human) meet, how interpenetrated they are, and how liberating the revelation of God’s love in this meeting is, if God had not caused him to suffer. -- Truth found truth shared. CM -
The bible solves the problem of evil for us, while proclaiming God's complete control over the human will. God created Adam sinless. But as soon as God gave Adam a Law, he wanted to sin. And that he did. But God controlled the test from start to finish and dictated the outcome. Had God forced Adam to sin if he did not want to, he would have been an innocent automaton. But Adam wanted to sin more than he loved God and therefore incurred the guilt.
-
@Dave_L said:
while proclaiming God's complete control over the human will. God created Adam sinless. But as soon as God gave Adam a Law, he wanted to sin.In the paradigm that you present Adam wants to sin only because God made him want to sin. Adam in such a paradigm has no free will because God completely controls him. In other words, Adam is not forced beyond his will because he simply does not have a will, to begin with, but is merely a puppet or robot.
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
while proclaiming God's complete control over the human will. God created Adam sinless. But as soon as God gave Adam a Law, he wanted to sin.In the paradigm that you present Adam wants to sin only because God made him want to sin. Adam in such a paradigm has no free will because God completely controls him. In other words, Adam is not forced beyond his will because he simply does not have a will, to begin with, but is merely a puppet or robot.
God created Adam with a nature that would want to sin if given a Law. But since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death. So in this way, God is sovereign yet Adam freely chose to sin.
Post edited by Dave_L on -
Then I understood you correctly in the paradigm that you presented Adam is created with a faulty nature that would want to sin and as you stated earlier God has complete control over the wills. Therefore, God in this paradigm is not only responsible for Adam's sin but is directly controlling him to sin.
-
@Mitchell said:
Then I understood you correctly in the paradigm that you presented Adam is created with a faulty nature that would want to sin and as you stated earlier God has complete control over the wills. Therefore, God in this paradigm is not only responsible for Adam's sin but is directly controlling him to sin.
It's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, That was his nature. But it is Adam's fault that he did. James speaks of lust setting the stage for sin, but the sin happens when we give in to lust.
-
@Dave_L said:
It's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, That was his nature. But it is Adam's fault that he did. James speaks of lust setting the stage for sin, but the sin happens when we give in to lust.A couple of tests of my logic, Dave:
1) Here you say it's not Adam's fault he wanted to sin. In your previous post you claimed
"God created Adam with a nature that would want to sin if given a law." Am I correct to conclude from your two statements that you believe it's God's fault Adam wanted to sin? (not that he did sin, but that he "wanted" to sin)2) In that earlier post, you said "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death." In your latest post, you contend it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin. To me, the logical outcome of those two assertions is that you believe it's not Adam's fault he "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin." Am I correct?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
It's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, That was his nature. But it is Adam's fault that he did. James speaks of lust setting the stage for sin, but the sin happens when we give in to lust.A couple of tests of my logic, Dave:
1) Here you say it's not Adam's fault he wanted to sin. In your previous post you claimed
"God created Adam with a nature that would want to sin if given a law." Am I correct to conclude from your two statements that you believe it's God's fault Adam wanted to sin? (not that he did sin, but that he "wanted" to sin)2) In that earlier post, you said "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death." In your latest post, you contend it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin. To me, the logical outcome of those two assertions is that you believe it's not Adam's fault he "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin." Am I correct?
1 = yes
2 = no. Adam wanted to sin by nature but without guilt. (James says we sin when we give in to lust). Adam yielded to lust, not being stopped by God as we are, and incurred the guilt of sin for the act. I'll try to explain:
This is why we ask God to lead us not into temptation. He led Adam into temptation, although Satan did the tempting. He also led Job into temptation when he drew Satan's attention to him. But Paul also tells us he will not allow Christians to be tempted above what we are able, but with the temptation he will provide a way of escape. Thus the difference between believing Job (who did not yield to temptation) and doubting Adam (who yielded to temptation). The Holy Spirit (God) led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. But we know Christ did not yield to satan's offers.
Post edited by Dave_L on -
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
This is why we ask God to lead us not into temptation. He led Adam into temptation, although Satan did the tempting. He also led Job into temptation when he drew Satan's attention to him. But Paul also tells us he will not allow Christians to be tempted above what we are able, but with the temptation he will provide a way of escape. Thus the difference between believing Job and doubting Adam. The Holy Spirit (God) led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.My use of the forums' "Quote" feature on your latest post, Dave, revealed portions of your response that you must have edited out before posting, but that somehow remained part the quoted content (odd!)
In that redacted material, your response to my first question is yes, that I am correct to conclude from your previous statements that you believe it was God's fault that Adam wanted to sin. Is that your response to my question? If not, what is your response?
In the redacted material, your answer to my second question - whether I'm correct to conclude from your statements that it's God's fault Adam "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin" - is no, a response that you explain in the paragraph that made it into the final form of your post.
But I don't see an answer to my question in said paragraph, Dave. In earlier posts, you claimed first that "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death," and second, that it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin. If Adam incurred guilt because he wanted to sin, AND it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, then whose fault is it that Adam incurred guilt? Isn't God's the only other possibility?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
This is why we ask God to lead us not into temptation. He led Adam into temptation, although Satan did the tempting. He also led Job into temptation when he drew Satan's attention to him. But Paul also tells us he will not allow Christians to be tempted above what we are able, but with the temptation he will provide a way of escape. Thus the difference between believing Job and doubting Adam. The Holy Spirit (God) led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.My use of the forums' "Quote" feature on your latest post, Dave, revealed portions of your response that you must have edited out before posting, but that somehow remained part the quoted content (odd!)
In that redacted material, your response to my first question is yes, that I am correct to conclude from your previous statements that you believe it was God's fault that Adam wanted to sin. Is that your response to my question? If not, what is your response?
In the redacted material, your answer to my second question - whether I'm correct to conclude from your statements that it's God's fault Adam "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin" - is no, a response that you explain in the paragraph that made it into the final form of your post.
But I don't see an answer to my question in said paragraph, Dave. In earlier posts, you claimed first that "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death," and second, that it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin. If Adam incurred guilt because he wanted to sin, AND it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, then whose fault is it that Adam incurred guilt? Isn't God's the only other possibility?
Sorry, I had to leave and edit later on the fly. But here's my final reply along with your questions:
A couple of tests of my logic, Dave:
1) Here you say it's not Adam's fault he wanted to sin. In your previous post you claimed
"God created Adam with a nature that would want to sin if given a law." Am I correct to conclude from your two statements that you believe it's God's fault Adam wanted to sin? (not that he did sin, but that he "wanted" to sin)
2) In that earlier post, you said "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death." In your latest post, you contend it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin. To me, the logical outcome of those two assertions is that you believe it's not Adam's fault he "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin." Am I correct?1 = yes
2 = no. Adam wanted to sin by nature but without guilt. (James says we sin when we give in to lust). Adam yielded to lust, not being stopped by God as we are, and incurred the guilt of sin for the act. I'll try to explain:
This is why we ask God to lead us not into temptation. He led Adam into temptation, although Satan did the tempting. He also led Job into temptation when he drew Satan's attention to him. But Paul also tells us he will not allow Christians to be tempted above what we are able, but with the temptation he will provide a way of escape. Thus the difference between believing Job (who did not yield to temptation) and doubting Adam (who yielded to temptation). The Holy Spirit (God) led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. But we know Christ did not yield to Satan’s offers.
-
@Dave_L said:
To my reading, Dave, you've done nothing here but repeat verbatim the content of your previous post, this time including the material redacted from your previous response. As a result, I still don't know the answer to the question I posed:
In earlier posts, you claimed first, that "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death," and second, that it's not Adam's fault he wanted to sin. If Adam incurred guilt because he wanted to sin, AND it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, then whose fault is it that Adam incurred guilt? Isn't God's fault the only other possibility?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
To my reading, Dave, you've done nothing here but repeat verbatim the content of your previous post, this time including the material redacted from your previous response. As a result, I still don't know the answer to the question I posed:
In earlier posts, you claimed first, that "since Adam wanted to sin after hearing the law, he incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death," and second, that it's not Adam's fault he wanted to sin. If Adam incurred guilt because he wanted to sin, AND it's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, then whose fault is it that Adam incurred guilt? Isn't God's fault the only other possibility?
Perhaps I didn't state my views as precisely as I should have. I'll try again. Adam wanted to sin but did not sin until he ate the fruit. James says sin does not happen until we cave to lust. Even though we have a sinful nature.
So in essence, Adam wanted to sin as soon as he heard the law. And freely chose to sin when he ate the fruit.
Something else that might help explain my position is that we are no better than Adam. The only difference is that God keeps those assigned to Christ from following through with their evil desires. (with some exceptions) And he does not keep others from them. I hope this helps.
-
@Dave_L said:
Perhaps I didn't state my views as precisely as I should have. I'll try again. Adam wanted to sin but did not sin until he ate the fruit. James says sin does not happen until we cave to lust. Even though we have a sinful nature.So your earlier contention - that Adam "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death" because he "wanted to sin after hearing the law" - did not precisely express your view. Your view is that David incurred that guilt after he actually sinned, not because he merely wanted to sin?
-
Dave,
Your point is a bit confusing at best. Reflect a bit and start anew. This may be helpful for all to better understand your point of view.Regardless, under any of your points, God is NOT the point of origin for evil. Nor is the "Law". Last, remember, God made Adam and Eve in His own image. No sin or flaws-- "perfect" ("complete", "mature", "freedom of choice"). In the Garden, Adam and Eve were warned of Lucifer ("accuser"--Fallen Angel). God is good and God is love. CM
-
@Dave_L said:
It's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, That was his nature. But it is Adam's fault that he did.Yet, in the paradigm you presented God controls people wills/agency.
Notice you stated that:@Dave_L said:
... proclaiming God's complete control over the human will... God controlled the test from start to finish and dictated the outcome.In other words, Adam never had free agency but was simply a puppet or a remote-controlled toy. In your paradigm, Adam sinned because he was programmed to and because God was controlling his will and dictating his actions.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Dave_L said:
Perhaps I didn't state my views as precisely as I should have. I'll try again. Adam wanted to sin but did not sin until he ate the fruit. James says sin does not happen until we cave to lust. Even though we have a sinful nature.So your earlier contention - that Adam "incurred the guilt and the wages of sin which is death" because he "wanted to sin after hearing the law" - did not precisely express your view. Your view is that David incurred that guilt after he actually sinned, not because he merely wanted to sin?
Thanks for helping me clarify this.
Adam naturally wanted to sin upon hearing the Law or he would not have. But he did not sin until he acted on it. James says lust turns into sin when acted on.
Look at the Genesis account. God created Adam sinless. Because sin is the violation of a law. And Adam did not have the law at this time.
God then gave Adam a law. Adam wanted to break this law or he would not have.
But Adam did not actually sin until he broke the law. (that is, until he ate from the forbidden tree).
Sin happened when Adam broke God's Law. But the law also revealed that Adam wanted to sin or he would not have.
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
It's not Adam's fault that he wanted to sin, That was his nature. But it is Adam's fault that he did.Yet, in the paradigm you presented God controls people wills/agency.
Notice you stated that:@Dave_L said:
... proclaiming God's complete control over the human will... God controlled the test from start to finish and dictated the outcome.In other words, Adam never had free agency but was simply a puppet or a remote-controlled toy. In your paradigm, Adam sinned because he was programmed to and because God was controlling his will and dictating his actions.
This would be true if Adam did not have a personality. By personality I mean the part of us that says "I" or "Me". And has likes and dislikes. Also a nature that makes us do what people do. Just as cats and dogs have natures that are very predictable in any given situation.
Just to make sure of what I'm saying about the nature of the beast, what does a dog freely choose to do when a stranger comes to the door? Or what does a cat freely choose to do if hungry, and a mouse happens by?
So God created Adam with a human nature that would freely choose certain courses of action in certain conditions.
As I posted a few minutes ago to Bill's question:
Adam naturally wanted to sin upon hearing the Law or he would not have. But he did not sin until he acted on it. James says lust turns into sin when acted on.
Look at the Genesis account. God created Adam sinless. Because sin is the violation of a law. And Adam did not have the law at this time.
God then gave Adam a law. Adam wanted to break this law or he would not have.
But Adam did not actually sin until he broke the law. (that is, until he ate from the forbidden tree).
Sin happened when Adam broke God's Law. But the law also revealed that Adam wanted to sin or he would not have.
Post edited by Dave_L on -
@Dave_L said:
This would be true if Adam did not have a personality. By personality I mean the part of us that says "I" or "Me". And has likes and dislikes.
. . .
So God created Adam with a human nature that would freely choose certain courses of action in certain conditions.Thank you! I appreciate your taking the time to explain this viewpoint. I think I can understand what you are saying a lot better now.
@Dave_L said:
Adam wanted to break this law or he would not have.In other words, Adam had an unrestricted moral agency at least for that particular choice.
@Dave_L said:
But Adam did not actually sin until he broke the law.In this case, then Jesus makes the law a whole lot stricter for he states or strongly hints that someone can actually commit sin in their heart. (Matthew 5:28)
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
This would be true if Adam did not have a personality. By personality I mean the part of us that says "I" or "Me". And has likes and dislikes.
. . .
So God created Adam with a human nature that would freely choose certain courses of action in certain conditions.Thank you! I appreciate your taking the time to explain this viewpoint. I think I can understand what you are saying a lot better now.
@Dave_L said:
Adam wanted to break this law or he would not have.In other words, Adam had an unrestricted moral agency at least for that particular choice.
Yes. But the law made Adam's nature sinful. As Paul says, I would not have known coveting if the law had not said, “You shall not covet. So we are all as Adam, only God stops those assigned to Christ from going too far. He opted not to stop Adam.
@Dave_L said:
But Adam did not actually sin until he broke the law.In this case, then Jesus makes the law a whole lot stricter for he states or strongly hints that someone can actually commit sin in their heart. (Matthew 5:28)
I think the way I understand this best is through OT Israel and the Law. The unregenerate masses kept the Law externally. God manipulated their wickedness into obedience for material gain. And through threat of loss for disobedience.
But those like Abraham were already good in nature because of the New Birth. And they loved God so much they only used the Law to fine tune the faithfulness already there.
-
@Dave_L said:
Look at the Genesis account. God created Adam sinless. Because sin is the violation of a law. And Adam did not have the law at this time.
God then gave Adam a law. Adam wanted to break this law or he would not have.
Not so, Dave, the law existed before creation. The law of nature, creation, and God. The is law a transcript of God's character. Review the meaning and context of the word "law" and "sin" in the Pentateuch (Gk)- the Christian, way of referring to those first five books of the Bible.
Without the law, there is no sin. e.g. How could Adam and Eve sin if there is no law? On what basis did they sin? You may want to rethink this part of your reasoning. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
Look at the Genesis account. God created Adam sinless. Because sin is the violation of a law. And Adam did not have the law at this time.
God then gave Adam a law. Adam wanted to break this law or he would not have.
Not so, Dave, the law existed before creation. The law of nature, creation, and God. The is law a transcript of God's character. Review the meaning and context of the word "law" and "sin" in the Pentateuch (Gk)- the Christian, way of referring to those first five books of the Bible.
Without the law, there is no sin. e.g. How could Adam and Eve sin if there is no law? On what basis did they sin? You may want to rethink this part of your reasoning. CM
“For the law brings wrath, because where there is no law there is no transgression either.” (Romans 4:15)
So God created Adam sinless. But we also know Adam had the law written in his heart. But how could he sin against it, if God did not set constraints?
-
So....
- Adam was the only creature to ever exist with a wee bit of free will, an attribute God Himself does not have but that He created in one or maybe two creatures.
- Adam was created sinless and had no sin nature but somehow by hook or by crook managed to sin anyway because the law of sin was written on his heart.
Dave's L's Theology Fundamentals 101.
If I have it wrong, please help a poor student make sense of it all.
-
@GaoLu said:
So....- Adam was the only creature to ever exist with a wee bit of free will, an attribute God Himself does not have but that He created in one or maybe two creatures.
- Adam was created sinless and had no sin nature but somehow by hook or by crook managed to sin anyway because the law of sin was written on his heart.
Dave's L's Theology Fundamentals 101.
If I have it wrong, please help a poor student make sense of it all.
Thanks for your interest in this and helping to fine tune our understanding.
By nature I mean "the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it."
A cat has a nature that makes it different from a dog. They think differently, they act differently, they respond differently and so on.
God has a nature that makes him different from all living beings that he created. But God being the cause - he acts according to his nature. And his creatures react to him according to their natures. If God did not first have a nature of omnipotence or omniscience, he would be powerless to think and will it.
Adam freely reacted to God's law in the garden according to his nature. Paul says where there is no law there is no sin. So God created Adam sinless apart from any law meant to restrain his actions. When God gave Adam the constraints of law, he obviously wanted to sin, or he would not have. God did not force him to sin, nor did he prevent him from sinning. But Adam wanted to sin according to external forces bearing upon him, and because of his nature.
People freely choose to sin because of their reaction to law. But God controls their actions keeping them in line with his plan for the future. In the case of Christians, they freely choose according to the holy nature imparted in the New Birth. And God also controls their actions keeping them in line with his plan for the future.
-
@Dave_L said:
God has a nature that makes him different from all living beings that he created. But
God being the cause - he acts according to his nature. And his creatures react to him according to their natures. If God did not first have a nature of omnipotence or omniscience, he would be powerless to think and will it.
Dave, may I suggest you re-read the thread on the "Image of God" and my posts in particular? It may help with your view of God and man. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
God has a nature that makes him different from all living beings that he created. But
God being the cause - he acts according to his nature. And his creatures react to him according to their natures. If God did not first have a nature of omnipotence or omniscience, he would be powerless to think and will it.
Dave, may I suggest you re-read the thread on the "Image of God" and my posts in particular? It may help with your view of God and man. CM
We have the image of God because of many shared characteristics. The big difference is that God acts and we react.
