Did God create sin?

[Free]

I must say that to Love God was never my choice. I was moved by revelation of Who He Is. I would be patronizing God for me to say I chose to love Him, like the prodigal son saying he came back out of his benevolence. I'll believe you chose to love Him when you tell me what was your other option, death? It's like claiming you decided to Love the all powerful, the all knowing, Who laid down His life on a cross of torture for you when you were already dead in sin, because you had the option of staying dead. Is this not disingenuious? What viable option is there compared to the Truth in all honesty?

We may be compelled to love Him but that does not negate the choice. If we indeed have no choice then it isn't true love, it is "forced love," which is a contradiction. The only "forced love" is rape. The very idea of love presumes the ability to choose.

 

[Former Christian]

Bonairos

You’re Welcome.

Differences of opinion should never be automatically considered the result of corruption. It could be the result of an incomplete understanding or a misunderstanding. We are all growing, or should be. We are limited beings due to our nature, and from a Christian point of view due to the fall.

Denominationalism exists because of arrogance, to think that we can understand anything sufficiently to consider it authoritative. Whether as a distinction for a denomination or a distinction to judge others. This may be due to my Protestant background, but the Bible, considered the word of God by all Christians except the liberals, is the only real authority, and then only in conjunction with Jesus who teaches by it through the Holy Spirit. This is in total opposition to the denominational nature of Christianity, wherein the only real authority is in their own doctrinal standards.

Childeye has an opinion that is not popular. Doesn’t mean that his unique perspective is the result of corruption or has nothing to offer. I have never met the perfect man who is always right. Nor have I met a man who is so imperfect or corrupt that he is always wrong. This quote that Free has on his posts conveys this same idea, "If you can ever make any major religion look absolutely ludicrous, chances are you haven't understood it."--Ravi Zacharias.

Denominations closes minds to all truth but its own. And obviously, as seen by the different denominational distinctions, not all denominational truth is THE TRUTH. Should we follow them or one of them? Jesus using the Bible through the Holy Spirit opens minds to the truth of God.

FC

 

[Asyncritus]

"When you dig a hole you inadvertently create a pile."

That is a very wise saying, pard.

It is most relevant here, because when God created the possibility of doing good, the possibility of doing evil automatically came into existence.

"Thou shalt not eat of it (the tree of knowledge of good and evil)" automatically created the possibility of eating it.

But Scripture is exceedingly plain on this point, and leaves no room for doubt:

"for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man".

 

[Former Christian]

Asyncritus

The existence of a positive always implies the possibility of a negative. Thus God did not necessarily create evil because the positive that he has created, i.e., “it is goodâ€, has with it, not the creation of evil, but the possibility of evil. Am I understanding you correctly?

FC

 

[childeye]

We may be compelled to love Him but that does not negate the choice. If we indeed have no choice then it isn't true love, it is "forced love," which is a contradiction. The only "forced love" is rape. The very idea of love presumes the ability to choose.

Agape Love is not rape. We don't choose our family yet we love them. As the bible says, he who does not love his brother does not know God. Love therefore is not predicated on choice but knowledge of God. God is Love, eternal Love. It does not end, and He will not change. He will not ever break your heart. That is why He is trustworthy and Holy. This is the Love we see on the cross in which we as Christians are supposed to believe in. You seem to somehow give more credence to a love that is able to break your heart by having the option of choosing not to Love you.

 

[childeye]

Bonairos

You’re Welcome.

Differences of opinion should never be automatically considered the result of corruption. It could be the result of an incomplete understanding or a misunderstanding. We are all growing, or should be. We are limited beings due to our nature, and from a Christian point of view due to the fall.

Denominationalism exists because of arrogance, to think that we can understand anything sufficiently to consider it authoritative. Whether as a distinction for a denomination or a distinction to judge others. This may be due to my Protestant background, but the Bible, considered the word of God by all Christians except the liberals, is the only real authority, and then only in conjunction with Jesus who teaches by it through the Holy Spirit. This is in total opposition to the denominational nature of Christianity, wherein the only real authority is in their own doctrinal standards.

Childeye has an opinion that is not popular. Doesn’t mean that his unique perspective is the result of corruption or has nothing to offer. I have never met the perfect man who is always right. Nor have I met a man who is so imperfect or corrupt that he is always wrong. This quote that Free has on his posts conveys this same idea, "If you can ever make any major religion look absolutely ludicrous, chances are you haven't understood it."--Ravi Zacharias.

Denominations closes minds to all truth but its own. And obviously, as seen by the different denominational distinctions, not all denominational truth is THE TRUTH. Should we follow them or one of them? Jesus using the Bible through the Holy Spirit opens minds to the truth of God.

FC

FC, you are very diplomatic and disarming in your discourse. I applaud your even handed approach. Certainly if you met someone who knew everything how would you know unless you knew everything. Subsequently the fool no doubt regards foolishness as wisdom. Suffice it to say that for man, who may be learning forever, knowing everything can only be equated with trusting your Maker. That would also mean one who distrusts his Maker knows nothing.

Why my perspective is not popular I cannot fathom. God subjected the creation to vanity unwillingly so that He might subject it to hope. Paul said it, and I find it reassuring. I like God being in control, but that's me.

 

[Free]

Agape Love is not rape.

Of course it isn't; no one is saying it is.

We don't choose our family yet we love them. As the bible says, he who does not love his brother does not know God. Love therefore is not predicated on choice but knowledge of God. God is Love, eternal Love. It does not end, and He will not change. He will not ever break your heart. That is why He is trustworthy and Holy. This is the Love we see on the cross in which we as Christians are supposed to believe in. You seem to somehow give more credence to a love that is able to break your heart by having the option of choosing not to Love you.

None of this really addresses the point that the very concept of love presumes free choice in the matter. If there is no choice, it isn't true love; it can't be, by definition.

 

[Bonairos]

Differences of opinion should never be automatically considered the result of corruption. It could be the result of an incomplete understanding or a misunderstanding. We are all growing, or should be. We are limited beings due to our nature, and from a Christian point of view due to the fall.

Again for clarity, on this topic only or all? I'm trying to follow not just your thoughts on a subject but your convictions and principles as well.


More importantly, does this line of reasoning apply to all (yourself included) or to only those who may not agree (or understand, though trying) your opinion on matters of revealed knowledge?


Here's my lack of understanding. You promote revealed knowledge of the things pertaining to Christ on different threads (and there is nothing wrong with that, I appreciate listening).

It is received (by me) that your intent is to bring others into a greater knowledge of God (and I may be assuming) to cause them to grow deeper in Christ.

Yet, you have stated WITH this revealed "truth" that you possess, you are at the same time contemplating becoming an Athiest; someone who declares, "There is no God!"

You also stated elsewhere in this community that you have only two choices with your revealed truth.

1. Start another denomination (which you cannot do because of your staunch stance on the nature of denominations).

or

2. Become an all out Athiest.


You also refuse (for lack of a better word) to be referred to as a Christian. Hence emphasizing you are a former Christian.



Okay. No, NOT okay!

Something is wrong with this picture. Or is it just me?!


I only ask this because if I (or anyone else) would take your posts seriously (and the statements you make) it would do good to know for certain if your intentions are to gather or scatter.

How can one proport to share or reveal the things "of God" and at the same time declare that Athiesm (denying the Holy One's existence) looks appealing.

Something does not jive.


Forgive me mods if I went off topic. If I did, it was only because many stream through the community. The last thing we need from silent inquirers is the perception that CF.net approves being taught the Word of God by anyone who would then deny His existence.


Again Former Christian, for my clarification. Is Athiesm part of your reality?



Be blessed, Stay blessed, and be Bold!

 

[childeye]

Of course it isn't; no one is saying it is.


None of this really addresses the point that the very concept of love presumes free choice in the matter. If there is no choice, it isn't true love; it can't be, by definition.

You said forced Love is rape. I am forced to Love God since He is more than worthy and the knowledge of Him is breathtaking and worth more than my own existence. I fall on my knees out of pure worship because He is worthy. I thank Him whole heartedly for everything He gives me, especially correction and conviction of sin. God is Love and He exsists eternal and so cannot be a concept of man as you put it. Agape Love is not a choice and yet it is true Love. All things began in love as the norm, that is why the fall of man is characterised as a fall. Love is a compassion for others you feel involuntarily, not deliberately conjured by your will. You might run from it because you are afraid of what it will cost you. This is not a freewill it is fear. Rationally speaking it will cost you more to run from Love than it will to obey it. In fact you will be greatly rewarded for trusting in God. All I've said here is self evident to me. Where do you get this notion that you choose to love or it is not Love by definition? You talk as if you've never felt Love.

 

[Asyncritus]

Asyncritus

The existence of a positive always implies the possibility of a negative. Thus God did not necessarily create evil because the positive that he has created, i.e., “it is goodâ€, has with it, not the creation of evil, but the possibility of evil. Am I understanding you correctly?

FC

Absolutely.

 

[Ashua]

God created "sin" by contingency when He legislated His Holy Law. Even as the night exists to contrast day, so sin is the inverse condition of righteousness, which is the ordinance of the Most High.

 

[childeye]

God created "sin" by contingency when He legislated His Holy Law. Even as the night exists to contrast day, so sin is the inverse condition of righteousness, which is the ordinance of the Most High.

Hard to disagree with this assessment although scripture tells us sin exists apart from the law as well as does righteousness.

 

[Former Christian]

Childeye

You said, “Agape Love is not rape. We don't choose our family yet we love them. As the bible says, he who does not love his brother does not know God. Love therefore is not predicated on choice but knowledge of God. God is Love, eternal Love. It does not end, and He will not change. He will not ever break your heart. That is why He is trustworthy and Holy. This is the Love we see on the cross in which we as Christians are supposed to believe in. You seem to somehow give more credence to a love that is able to break your heart by having the option of choosing not to Love you.”

This may be another instance of defining terms differently. The eternal agape of God that we can practice perfectly only in Christ through walking by the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:16-25), is clearly defined by Paul (1 Cor 13). According to his definition, affection has nothing to do with it. Affection is something else entirely. Affection and Agape are frequently as confused in Christianity as is lust confused with affection in the secular world. We may be able to practice Agape to some small degree due to the fact that we are created in the image of God. But certainly only Divinity can practice Agape perfectly and we through Divinity, in Christ through walking by the Holy Spirit. I can love my family in the sense of agape without having any affection toward them at all. The same with my brothers in Christ. I can love them in the sense of agape, according to the definition given by Paul, without having any affection for them at all. If I understood my salvation in terms of affection, then there is no way that I am Saved. I simply do not feel that way toward the brethren. I feel that way toward some in my family and toward my close friends, most of whom happen to be brethren. But I don’t feel that way toward the community of the brethren as a whole. Does that admission make me a non-believer? What if I center myself in Jesus Christ and walk by the Spirit, rather than by what I feel, affection or no affection for the brethren. Am I then able to practice Agape as it is defined by Paul toward all the brethren? Am I then able to receive the assurance that I am in Christ and through Christ I am saved?


You said, “FC, you are very diplomatic and disarming in your discourse.”

LOL Thank you. I think.


You said, “Certainly if you met someone who knew everything how would you know unless you knew everything. Subsequently the fool no doubt regards foolishness as wisdom. Suffice it to say that for man, who may be learning forever, knowing everything can only be equated with trusting your Maker. That would also mean one who distrusts his Maker knows nothing.”

I quite agree.


You said, “Why my perspective is not popular I cannot fathom.”

It is simple really. Others consider their own perspectives to be more authoritative than your own. Not everything that I believe, that is a part of my perspective, is popular either. When we present our perspective in an authoritative manner, as if there is no possibility that any other perspective has value, then we not only show our own arrogance by thinking that we know better than anyone else, but we also rub the people who disagree with us the wrong way. And in my experience, a person rubbed the wrong way can no longer hear anything you’re saying. That is, to them, it is your perspective that has no value. And when both sides of a conversation feels that way about one another, the conversation can quickly degenerate into name calling and straw men wherein the real essence of the conversation is forgotten or voided.


You said, “God subjected the creation to vanity unwillingly so that He might subject it to hope. Paul said it, and I find it reassuring. I like God being in control, but that's me.”

That is according to my experience in Christ also. It is perhaps why I haven’t yet been able to walk across the line between Theism and Atheism into full Atheism.


Originally Posted by Ashua
God created "sin" by contingency when He legislated His Holy Law. Even as the night exists to contrast day, so sin is the inverse condition of righteousness, which is the ordinance of the Most High.

You said, “Hard to disagree with this assessment although scripture tells us sin exists apart from the law as well as does righteousness.”

Sin exists apart from the Law. But the law reveals the nature of sin (Rom 7:7) and of righteous (Rom 7:12).

FC

 

[Former Christian]

Bonairos

Are you concerned for clarity or are you concerned for this “communityâ€? Is this “community†simply another denomination? What I have already written should be sufficient for you to be clear. You should already know the answer to the question, “Is Atheism part of your reality?â€

FC

 

[Bonairos]

Bonairos

Are you concerned for clarity or are you concerned for this “communityâ€? Is this “community†simply another denomination? What I have already written should be sufficient for you to be clear. You should already know the answer to the question, “Is Atheism part of your reality?â€

BOTH! Yes, I personally seek clarity. And yes, I am concerned for this community. But No, this "community" is not simply another denomination.

That's straight forward answers to straight forward questions I would say.


As for already knowing the answer to "Is Atheism part of your reality?" If I had a straight forward, clear answer there would be no need ask the question (again and again).

Simple question, looking for a simple answer. Yes or No.


I believe you are aware why I am publicly asking for clarification. If not, let me clarify.

You have left open the answer when directly asked (on this thread as well as the "Truth" thread). Nothing definitive though I have not only quoted you, but tried to relay your posts in a positive light.

I'm not here to get into argrument with you or anyone. I am here to dialog and perhaps understand. But how can I do either if I am not clear in what your postion is (except that of "the nature of Christianity is denominationalism").

Again, for me and other readers who may be attempting to take you seriously, "Is Atheism ("There is no God!") part of your reality?!"



Be blessed, Stay blessed, and be Bold!

 

[Former Christian]

Bonairos

You said, “ "Is Atheism ("There is no God!") part of your reality?!".... Simple question, looking for a simple answer. Yes or No. â€

There is no simple answer to that question. Especially for one such as myself who is straddling the line between Atheism and Theism. The answer is both yes and no. As I said before, I’m grappling with the answer to this question myself. If I was not having a problem with this issue, I would not be here. I would be on an Atheist forum badmouthing the Christians Like Richard Dawkins. Or more likely, depending on reactions, I would be a little more tolerant as is one of my favorite scientists, who happens to be an Atheist, Neil deGrasse Tyson.

I can’t answer your question definitively because as yet I haven’t a definitive answer. My experience has been Christian for many years. It is not Christian now. It is only Biblical now. I am what I am. If that automatically makes me an Atheist in your eyes, as it has to some already, I can’t help that. And I have to admit that I’m still a little surprised at such a response from Protestants.

When dealing with questions requiring a Biblical response, I answer honestly according to what I truly believe is a Biblical response at the moment. I believe that I can still do that because I still believe that the Bible is the written word of God, used by Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit to teach us all.

You would be surprised how accurately some American Atheists understand the Bible. And a few of the Atheists I’m referring to happen to be friends. And no, you probably wouldn’t know any of them. They know what is portrayed in the Bible better than most Christians, but they reject it as being true.

 

[childeye]

Childeye

You said, “Agape Love is not rape. We don't choose our family yet we love them. As the bible says, he who does not love his brother does not know God. Love therefore is not predicated on choice but knowledge of God. God is Love, eternal Love. It does not end, and He will not change. He will not ever break your heart. That is why He is trustworthy and Holy. This is the Love we see on the cross in which we as Christians are supposed to believe in. You seem to somehow give more credence to a love that is able to break your heart by having the option of choosing not to Love you.”

This may be another instance of defining terms differently. The eternal agape of God that we can practice perfectly only in Christ through walking by the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:16-25), is clearly defined by Paul (1 Cor 13). According to his definition, affection has nothing to do with it. Affection is something else entirely. Affection and Agape are frequently as confused in Christianity as is lust confused with affection in the secular world. We may be able to practice Agape to some small degree due to the fact that we are created in the image of God. But certainly only Divinity can practice Agape perfectly and we through Divinity, in Christ through walking by the Holy Spirit. I can love my family in the sense of agape without having any affection toward them at all. The same with my brothers in Christ. I can love them in the sense of agape, according to the definition given by Paul, without having any affection for them at all. If I understood my salvation in terms of affection, then there is no way that I am Saved. I simply do not feel that way toward the brethren. I feel that way toward some in my family and toward my close friends, most of whom happen to be brethren. But I don’t feel that way toward the community of the brethren as a whole. Does that admission make me a non-believer? What if I center myself in Jesus Christ and walk by the Spirit, rather than by what I feel, affection or no affection for the brethren. Am I then able to practice Agape as it is defined by Paul toward all the brethren? Am I then able to receive the assurance that I am in Christ and through Christ I am saved?


You said, “FC, you are very diplomatic and disarming in your discourse.”

LOL Thank you. I think.


You said, “Certainly if you met someone who knew everything how would you know unless you knew everything. Subsequently the fool no doubt regards foolishness as wisdom. Suffice it to say that for man, who may be learning forever, knowing everything can only be equated with trusting your Maker. That would also mean one who distrusts his Maker knows nothing.”

I quite agree.


You said, “Why my perspective is not popular I cannot fathom.”

It is simple really. Others consider their own perspectives to be more authoritative than your own. Not everything that I believe, that is a part of my perspective, is popular either. When we present our perspective in an authoritative manner, as if there is no possibility that any other perspective has value, then we not only show our own arrogance by thinking that we know better than anyone else, but we also rub the people who disagree with us the wrong way. And in my experience, a person rubbed the wrong way can no longer hear anything you’re saying. That is, to them, it is your perspective that has no value. And when both sides of a conversation feels that way about one another, the conversation can quickly degenerate into name calling and straw men wherein the real essence of the conversation is forgotten or voided.


You said, “God subjected the creation to vanity unwillingly so that He might subject it to hope. Paul said it, and I find it reassuring. I like God being in control, but that's me.”

That is according to my experience in Christ also. It is perhaps why I haven’t yet been able to walk across the line between Theism and Atheism into full Atheism.


Originally Posted by Ashua
God created "sin" by contingency when He legislated His Holy Law. Even as the night exists to contrast day, so sin is the inverse condition of righteousness, which is the ordinance of the Most High.

You said, “Hard to disagree with this assessment although scripture tells us sin exists apart from the law as well as does righteousness.”

Sin exists apart from the Law. But the law reveals the nature of sin (Rom 7:7) and of righteous (Rom 7:12).

FC

Yes Former something,(joke). I think you are definitely diplomatic and smart enough to wonder if that is a compliment. And as you have pointed out, I come across as definitive in my beliefs which riles some. Who the hell do I think I am speaking the Truth? How dare I know something? Honestly, I see no other way to speak Truth but definitively. If I don't know I will say I don't know since that would be true, but I'm not going to lie before God or shrink from what people will think of me for speaking the Truth. I have a conviction that comes from spiritual sight. Everything I say is based on one simple premise and so cannot be wrong if the premise is not wrong. That is that there is a God that created all things. He is Love and He is Spirit. He is Truth, Light and Life. He is Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent.

Semantics are the tool of the devil and every other lying attorney. Yet they exist and cannot be avoided. Hence people hear sometimes what was never said or say what was never meant. So to address your comment on Agape Love, suffice it to say affection is not applicable since Love encompasses both affection and disaffection. In other words without Love we would be indifferent. That is why I define Love as compassion for others, an empathy to feel their feelings.

More concerning to me is your theism atheism dilemma. You're too smart to be left out in the gray area or maybe that's your problem. For I sense the Holy Spirit working in you yet you may think it's you. So I will prove to you there is a God and show you the source of my conviction. All you need do is be honest to see it because it is self-evident. Actually I find it silly that we might not agree on what the term God encompasses so before I say more I would invite you to define God so that the devil does not confound our discourse.

 

[Bonairos]

There is no simple answer to that question. Especially for one such as myself who is straddling the line between Atheism and Theism. The answer is both yes and no.

Thank you. I trust you are being as honest as you possibly can.

I can’t answer your question definitively because as yet I haven’t a definitive answer. My experience has been Christian for many years. It is not Christian now. It is only Biblical now.

Perhaps you've gotten the cart before the horse. Why attempt to discuss and adamantly relay the things of God (as 'revealed' to you) if you struggle with if He even exists in the first place? That's just spinning one's wheels without going anywhere.

I am what I am. If that automatically makes me an Atheist in your eyes, as it has to some already, I can’t help that. And I have to admit that I’m still a little surprised at such a response from Protestants.

In my eyes? I form an opinion by what you reveal about yourself. Hence the questions for clarity.

A little surprised by the response by Protestants? That should be taken as a compliment! If there was no concern, there would be no questioning the questionable.

When dealing with questions requiring a Biblical response, I answer honestly according to what I truly believe is a Biblical response at the moment. I believe that I can still do that because I still believe that the Bible is the written word of God, used by Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit to teach us all.

See the contradiction in your statements (getting the cart before the horse)? How can one say he believes the Bible to be the written word of God, and in the next breath say, "I don't know if the God of the Bible even exists?!"

You would be surprised how accurately some American Atheists understand the Bible. And a few of the Atheists I’m referring to happen to be friends. And no, you probably wouldn’t know any of them. They know what is portrayed in the Bible better than most Christians, but they reject it as being true.

Seriously, you see no contradiction with that statement? Perhaps that is one reason why myself (and other "Christians") seem to not take you seriously when you promote your revealed truth.

Yes I would be surprised for the same reasons I said earlier. "Huh? You understand the Bible yet reject it as being true??"

Understanding based on what? Oh, I get it now. Based on your view that "There is no God!" (just as the fool has said in his heart!)


Perhaps it would be more productive (and get real answers) if you sought revelation of God's existence (and settled it in your heart) before attempting to proport a biblical response pertaining to a God (who in your opinion) may or may not exist.


Have I been too strong on you? Perhaps. But then again, you could take it as a compliment.


Be blessed, Stay blessed, and be Bold!

 

[Free]

Back to topic please.

 

[xounstaer]

i believe sin in some way is a partical required for progress, this has been said in different ways before though.

for the rest you surely know the reasoning good need bad and the other way around otherwise neither would be. and no matter how perfect the world in the future might get. certainly to each person itself new sins will pop in mind even if first you didnt consider them or so sas sin.

god is all right?
so any action or any being is part of god and/or created by god.
but never loose the eye or focus on whatfor..