Board index ‹ Sin

[Jank]

If God allows sin so that he may be glorified, isn’t this an example of the ends justifying the means? God is allowing evil in order that he can be glorified more, so is sin justified?

[jimwalton]

The clearest answer to your question is that the Bible never teaches that God allowed (or allows) sin so that He may be glorified. I don't know where you heard this or read it, but it's not true.

Maybe if you can elaborate your thoughts or your source we can talk about it more, but you've started with an untrue premise, which in turn is leading you to a false conclusion (the ends justify the means, in this case).

[Jank]

Sorry, I thought that was a widely accepted, but maybe I’m misunderstanding.

If all things work together for good (Romans 8:28, Genesis 50:20), then sin is used by God for some eventual or ultimate good. All good things glorify God, I assume. If evil was not necessary to serve some purpose, then why would God allow it?

[jimwalton]

God is sometimes able to make use of sin for His purposes, but that's different from God allowing sin "so that he may be glorified." Sin happens because people choose to sin, but since God is always at work to undo sin and its effects, He then works with the cards in His hands, so to speak, to win the game. More cards are dealt, and God adjusts again—all the while using His influence towards good. Your initial question made it seem like you thought God created sin so that He could be glorified, using sin as a means to reach the end of His glorification, which is a very different understanding.

> All good things glorify God, I assume.

This is true, but it has nothing to do with sin.

> If evil was not necessary to serve some purpose, then why would God allow it?

Humans have to free will; it's an essential aspect of our humanity. Without it there would be no reasoning power, no science, no love, and no accountability.

God didn't create evil or sin, His created beings did because they had free will. God, then, developed a plan to deal with sin, to use it to His advantage, to redeem us from it, and to eventually destroy it. It does serve some purpose, but (1) God didn't create it, (2) He doesn't allow it so that he will be glorified, but (3) He does use it to backfire on itself and actually potentially accomplish some good.

[Jank]

This is sounding more like a reactionary God, one that has to wait to see what people do and “then” react. I was under the impression God was more sovereign, foreknowing, and planning. He would have known man would sin and even planned for it.

> Your initial question made it seem like you thought God created sin so that He could be glorified, using sin as a means to reach the end of His glorification, which is a very different understanding.

Is the purpose of creation not so that God could be glorified, both in his power and his love for humanity?

> This is true, but it has nothing to do with sin.

I reasoned it like this:

P1: All things work together for [undisclosed good]
P2: “All things” include sin
C1: Sin is worked for [undisclosed good]
P3: All good things glorify God
C2: Therefore, God is glorified (in some way) by sin’s existence

Do you disagree with something here?

> God didn't create evil or sin, His created beings did because they had free will.

I’m on board with this, but how does that explain the need for sin? God has free will, but he doesn’t sin, so clearly free will doesn’t necessitate sin. So why did God decide to allow sin?

Maybe this will simplify my question a bit: Is sin necessary in any way? Not in the sense that God was “forced” to create it, but that it was needed to achieve some end goal.

[jimwalton]

> This is sounding more like a reactionary God, one that has to wait to see what people do and “then” react.

Not that I get to be the one who decides, but I actually prefer a God who is responsive to my actions and circumstances rather than one who is detached or whose hand is forced in a certain direction. Jeremiah 18.1-12 shows just how responsive God is, and (I think) with good reason. So also Jonah 3.10).

> I was under the impression God was more sovereign, foreknowing, and planning. He would have known man would sin and even planned for it.

He did know sin would happen, and He did plan for it (1 Peter 1.20). But we are not to think God determined everything that happens. It's not all set in stone, as Jer. 18 shows.

> Is the purpose of creation not so that God could be glorified, both in his power and his love for humanity?

That's at least part of it. There are other reasons God created, such as He wanted more children (Rom. 8.6-18, 29-30; Jn. 1.12; Heb. 2.10), to do good works (Eph. 2.10), so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life (2 Cor. 5.5).

> P2: “All things” include sin

Ah, here's the flaw in your reasoning. Romans 8 is about sin being destroyed because it's not good, not that sin is included in "all things working together for good" (Rom. 8.28).

* Romans 8.2: we are being set free from the law of sin
* Romans 8.3: sin is condemned
* Romans 8.5-8: sin is contrary to the work of God
* Romans 8.10: sin is death, whereby God is life

What is the GOOD is being freed from sin (8.2), that we live according to the Spirit (8.4), that we live in life (8.10-11), and to be redeemed, adopted as children (8.23-25). The GOOD is divine good (salvation) and conforming to Christ's person. God is working so that we can participate in the goodness God is producing.

"All things" doesn't include sin. Sin is contrary to the goodness God is producing.

> I’m on board with this, but how does that explain the need for sin?

There is no need for sin. Sin is a viral and unwelcome invader.

> So why did God decide to allow sin?

God didn't decide to allow sin. Sin came as an intruder (James 1.13-15).

> Is sin necessary in any way?

No.

> that it was needed to achieve some end goal.

No. Now that it's here God uses it sometimes and in some ways to accomplish his purposes, but generally and ultimately sin is the enemy and is doomed for destruction. Sin is the disease that the Great Physician will eradicate.

[Jank]

> Not that I get to be the one who decides, but I actually prefer a God who is responsive to my actions and circumstances rather than one who is detached or whose hand is forced in a certain direction.

That’s not really what I said, though. The alternative to “react” isn’t “detached” or “forced.” I’m talking about God being in control, like Proverbs 16:9, 20:24, 16:33, Amos 3:6, or Jeremiah 10:23.

I’m not saying complete free will, nor am I saying completely determined. A combination of the two is typically the what Christians believe, correct? God let’s people have free will, but nothing happens apart from his plan (Proverbs 19:21)?

> It's not all set in stone, as Jer. 18 shows.

How do we reconcile Jeremiah 18 with the verses I listed? Isn’t God considered “outside” time and sees all of existence?

> Ah, here's the flaw in your reasoning. Romans 8 is about…

Interesting, thank you for the explanation. What about Genesis 50:20? Does this mean God only occasionally uses sin for good, or does he use it all the time?

> > So why did God decide to allow sin?
> God didn't decide to allow sin. Sin came as an intruder (James 1.13-15).

That verse doesn’t really tackle what I’m asking. God is sovereign, all powerful, and the creator. Something can’t exist in his creation unless he lets it exist, right? Otherwise wouldn’t we be saying there exists something that God can’t control?

[jimwalton]

Hey, thanks for good conversation. Now we're getting somewhere. I've never been too pumped on the "God is in control" cliche of many Christians. If God causes everything to happen, He is responsible for some unforgivable travesties and horrific human behavior. If everything that happens happens because God makes it happen, then we have to throw the Bible away because God is a monster. Instead, the Bible tells us that some people are monsters, and they grieve God. Let's look at your verses.

> Prov. 16.9; 20.24

The thrust of the proverb is that our plans are based on limited knowledge and vision, so we need to look to God for guidance to help us walk in the way of wisdom.

> Prov. 20.24

When we cast lots (a common practice to discern God's will), we rely on God to give us His guidance.

> Amos 3.6

The meaning of this verse is along the lines of "Be sure your sins will find you out." The book of Amos is about God's judgment of Israel because of their apostasy. This verse is saying that the disaster that is coming to them is God's judgment over their sin.

> Jeremiah 10.23

The chapter is about the contrast between false gods and the true God. Those who follow false gods will experience the wrath of the true God (10.10). It is YHWH who is truly at work in the world, not the false gods (10.13-14). The people need to look to God for their wisdom.

Look at 10.21: "The shepherds are senseless and do not inquire of the Lord; so they do not prosper and all their flock is scattered." Verse 23 is the same theme: Get your guidance from God. Follow His will.

So you can see that NONE of these verses are saying that God controls everything and that our lives are determined (we're just robots going through the motions; God is in control).

> Prov. 19.21

Same as the others.

> How do we reconcile Jeremiah 18 with the verses I listed?

God is sovereign, but we're not robots. He is the King, but He doesn't determine everything. He lets many many things play themselves out by our decisions and by cause-and-effect.

> Gen. 50.20

God didn't purpose it, but God turned it around. The idea is that God works through our messy, stupid inefficiencies, including bad choices and human failure, to accomplish His purposes. Everett Fox says Joseph is saying, "You planned it for evil against me, but God re-planned your plan and turned it into good." There is no evil, stupidity, or sin dark enough that God can't redeem it.

> Something can’t exist in his creation unless he lets it exist, right? Otherwise wouldn’t we be saying there exists something that God can’t control?

We have to go with "yes" on this. Ultimately all that is in the system God allowed in the system, or else, as you say, "we be saying there exists something that God can’t control." But then we're left to struggle with, "What in the WORLD do we mean when we say 'God allowed it'?" That gets real difficult real fast, so it's a dicey term. I don't like the term "allowed," because it's too unrefined to say what we're trying to say, and it opens the door to a world of bad theology.

[Jank]

Thank you as well. I’ve been having a lot of trouble researching this topic, and you’ve been the most helpful so far.

> But then we're left to struggle with, "What in the WORLD do we mean when we say 'God allowed it'?" That gets real difficult real fast, so it's a dicey term.

Yeah that was my issue as well. I eventually decided on “allow” over “permit,” “ordains,” or anything else of the sort. To me, “allow” implied that God could stop it if he wanted to, but because he doesn’t, he lets it (continue to) exist, which I assumed was closest to the right idea.

> I've never been too pumped on the "God is in control" cliche of many Christians. If God causes everything to happen…

I was thinking of “control” more like a parent with a kid riding a bike, not that God is causing/making every little thing happen.

Like, when your kid is starting to learn to ride, the dad is right there with them, hands ready to grab on at any moment. He let’s the kid peddle and steer, but at any point he can take hold of the handles or tell his son where to go.

So when I said “God is in control,” I mean that God might let people do what they want, but everything we do God let’s happen. He could stop/cause anything he wanted, but he allows us to cause things sometimes. That’s how I was viewing it, at least.

> God is sovereign, but we're not robots.

I had always equated “sovereign” with “in control” (in the sense I described above). I’m guessing you see it differently, so what does that mean to you exactly?

> So you can see that NONE of these verses are saying that God controls everything and that our lives are determined (we're just robots going through the motions; God is in control).

I think I see what you mean by most of these verses, but I’m not convinced by your analysis of Proverbs 16:9: "The thrust of the proverb is that our plans are based on limited knowledge and vision, so we need to look to God for guidance to help us walk in the way of wisdom."

I don’t see anything about “knowledge” or what man uses to plan, more that even though man plans his steps, God is the one who establishes them. Despite whatever plans man has, God’s plan is the one that actually happens (is established).

Not to say that giving free will and letting you make your choice isn’t part of his plan sometimes, but everything that happens still goes through God, in a sense.

> We have to go with "yes" on this. Ultimately all that is in the system God allowed in the system

So however we want to say it (allows, let’s, permits, etc.), sin only exists because God does not prevent/remove it. So why doesn’t he? Or worded differently, what’s the motivation for letting it continue or exist to begin with?

[jimwalton]

> I was thinking of “control” more like a parent with a kid riding a bike, not that God is causing/making every little thing happen.

I think most people mean it in the latter sense, which makes me very uncomfortable. I think there are a lot of things God doesn't control, and that's exactly the point. This world is quite frankly a mess, and God is working to fix it. He's not making it happen. Egads.

> I had always equated “sovereign” with “in control” (in the sense I described above). I’m guessing you see it differently, so what does that mean to you exactly?

When there is a king who is sovereign over the land, it doesn't mean he controls everything that happens or controls what the people do. God's sovereignty means He has the power and authority to accomplish His purposes in history, at least some of which includes the plan of salvation and reconciling all things to Himself (Col. 1.20). He is certainly sovereign over sin and death, meaning that He has the power and authority to destroy them.

> Prov. 16.9

Since the proverbs are disconnected aphorisms, context doesn't help us much. From the other verses in Proverbs I wrote about, we can see it is the general perspective of the writer(s) of the Proverbs that these kinds of sayings generally mean that we shouldn't try to handle everything ourselves because there's so much we can't see and don't know; instead we should look to God for help. The question at hand is, "Is verse 9 different from the rest?"

The Hebrew word of issue in the verse is יָכִין (yakheen). It means "Prepare; make ready; establish; direct; put to rights; correct." So the question is for the interpreter: Does it mean God directs your steps, or that he determines them?

For me, the first part of the verse shows that humans do plan, and there's no problem with us making plans, and even an expectation that we will (which goes along with other Scriptures, like James 4.13-15, which see). As a guard against faithlessness, pride, and secularism, however, we are always to remember that we should look to God for ultimate direction, as James says. That's what I think.

> sin only exists because God does not prevent/remove it.

I think sin will always exist now that it has begun. Sin has been conquered (as has death), but I don't think it can ever be removed. In the end (Rev. 22.14), death and Hades are thrown into the Lake of eternal Fire. Presumably all residents will continue in their sin (rebellion against God) for eternity. God can't prevent it or remove it; what He does is forgive it and remove it from those who repent, and He redeems us from its power.