Making God the author of sin

Technically quoting scripture is a “ cut n paste “ and when we add our commentary it’s still technically a cut n paste . Both sides do this all of the time . I noticed those one one side get the free pass .

Are you sure the reason was "cut n paste"?
Posting the same posts (eg. a particular set of scriptures) over and over and over again is against the rules, and is referred to as "spamming".

Your side does it all the time.
Ours doesn't.
 
Are you sure the reason was "cut n paste"?
Posting the same posts (eg. a particular set of scriptures) over and over and over again is against the rules, and is referred to as "spamming".

Your side does it all the time.
Ours doesn't.
Your side cannot answer them

and wants to discuss the topic without coming to grips with them
 
And many are naive enough to think one is not influenced online lol . Another blind spot for many .

Can you quote any of these "naive" people?
(Yeah, I didn't think so.)

You guys are great at making unsubstantiated claims.
Backing them up? Not so much.
 
Logically, if God decrees all things he is necessarily the direct author of sin by virtue of the decree, no way around it.

Now to some people, they see no real difference between allowing sin and decreeing sin; they think allowing sin is just as evil.
from the1689 confession of faith;

Chapter 3: Of God's Decree​

1._____ God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will,

freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass;

yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein;

nor is violence offered to the will of the creature,
\
nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established;

in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.
\
 
Some old guys a long time ago asserting a logical contradiction doesn't somehow make it not a contradiction anymore.
Perhaps you need to understand this phrase;
nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established;

Dz...keep it simple, a Holy God cannot be the author of sin and still be holy,do you agree?
 
Perhaps you need to understand this phrase;
nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established;

Dz...keep it simple, a Holy God cannot be the author of sin and still be holy,do you agree?

Yeah, exactly so.

And this is precisely why God cannot "decree in himself, from all eternity... all things, whatsoever comes to pass" and still be holy.

If you want to allow direct logical contradictions than I can assert that Calvinism and Arminianism are both false and true simultaneously.
 
Yeah, exactly so.

And this is precisely why God cannot "decree in himself, from all eternity... all things, whatsoever comes to pass" and still be holy.

If you want to allow direct logical contradictions than I can assert that Calvinism and Arminianism are both false and true simultaneously.
I don't think he's allowing for any Contradiction...
 
Yeah, exactly so.

And this is precisely why God cannot "decree in himself, from all eternity... all things, whatsoever comes to pass" and still be holy.

If you want to allow direct logical contradictions than I can assert that Calvinism and Arminianism are both false and true simultaneously.
@Iconoclast , how would this Post be seen on your Forum? Would it fall within the Rules of etiquette as Edifying?
 
@Iconoclast , how would this Post be seen on your Forum? Would it fall within the Rules of etiquette?

Sounds bloodthirsty for banning someone unjustly.

God will hold you to account for all these unjust reports, and every other abuser on this forum, unless you repent.

No wonder I've been banned unjustly on here every other week for things Calvinist are constantly doing themselves.
 
Yeah, exactly so.

And this is precisely why God cannot "decree in himself, from all eternity... all things, whatsoever comes to pass" and still be holy.

If you want to allow direct logical contradictions than I can assert that Calvinism and Arminianism are both false and true simultaneously.
Nothing can exist or come into being outside of God's control.
There is not one atom, or particle outside of His control.
He would not be God...with all His Holy attributes if that could possibly take place.
 
Nothing can exist or come into being outside of God's control.
There is not one atom, or particle outside of His control.
He would not be God...with all His Holy attributes if that could possibly take place.
Did God decree the crucifixion? If so, then those who crucified Jesus did what God decreed would happen. Yet, they freely did it.
 
Did God decree the crucifixion? If so, then those who crucified Jesus did what God decreed would happen. Yet, they freely did it.
God decreed the event but not their desire to kill Christ

You cannot take one example of God's use of an evil desire for a redemptive purpose and just assume God causes all evil desires

that is not sound methodology
 
Did God decree the crucifixion? If so, then those who crucified Jesus did what God decreed would happen. Yet, they freely did it.

in which case they were commanded to sin and obeyed their god.. but it was not God.

The mormons believe the same. That adam and eve obeyed ‘god’ and the fall was his scheme. that adam was as christ when he ‘obeyed god’ by falling.


God does no evil , and causes no evil…

the satanic realm with its good and evil tree does that.

not God.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top