HOT TOPIC: God's Nature vs His Character

michael_legna's picture

In another thread we veered off ending up discussing the Nature of God esepcially His omniscience and omnipotence.

I hold that God is ALL powerful and ALL knowing and He just chooses not to do somethings and to not know certain things when it suits His plans.

The other side of the argument is that there are certain things God cannot do, like sin. That it is not just Him choosing to not sin but that He is completely incapable of sin, that it is an actual limit to His omnipotence and omniscience.

This thread is meant to give all an opportunity to present arguments for either side.

I will begin by posting a few responses to the last few posts of one other poster in the previous thread.

michael_legna's picture

Don't judge my consistency base on your interpretations of verse

JeffLogan said -
It might be well if you considered all the scriptures together as supporting each other rather than respond to each one individually. It gives the appearance that you are interpreting them in isolation--something you vehemently oppose.

Because I am a mere man I cannot do two things at once and so interpreting verses one at a time is all I can do. We have to consider all of my interpretations together once presented individually to see if they do indeed reconcile with each other and I believe they do. However I believe I have shown repeatedly that your interpretations do not, at least in those instances where you deign to even consider the ones I suggest.

JeffLogan said -
For example, I quoted Romans 3:4: “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.” And you replied with, "Again this can come by His free choice, it does not require God to be forced to be true." But doesn't it refer to men accusing God of being unfaithful?

Yes, but just because men accuse God does not mean He is guilty.

JeffLogan said -
And isn't the intent to convey the truth that God cannot lie even if men claim he does, or can?

No the intent is that God does not lie, it does not say whether that is do to God not being able to lie or whether He simply always chooses not to lie. You are reading the idea of "cannot" into the verse and that is the source of your error. You need to be certain you are not judging my consistency on your interpretation but on what the verse actually says.

JeffLogan said -
As scripture concludes, God is true and man is a liar.

Yes, but God can be true by choice not by force, so once again you are reading your doctrine into the verse if you think it supports your position and that approach to interpreting scripture is referred to as eisegesis and it is a well know erroneous method.

JeffLogan said -
In another place I wrote, "Sin is the absence of righteousness, of godliness." To which your retorted,

ML said -
"Sin is missing the mark, not doing what the standard has been established as. This means not doing what God has determined to be morally right for us. But this can be decided by God as what is right based on His free will."

JeffLogan said -
My statement is correct. If God is Righteousness and Truth, and sin is evil and lies, then where evil and lies are present, Righteousness and Truth are absent.

Prove it. Show us some scripture which specifically claims God is righteousness and not that it is merely your personal opinion. I have done a search of the KJV and there is no verse which says God IS righteousness or truth. There are many that say He has those characteristics but not that He is composed of such qualities as your position requires.

JeffLogan said -
The character of Jesus Christ is the standard of Righteousness, Truth, and Love; not merely His actions or instructions. He asks us to be like Him and His laws, statutes and judgments are likewise spoken or written revelations of His character. He is the mark men miss.

No His character is what men miss. Not His nature because we cannot even be called to meet His nature. We can be like God but we cannot become God. So if we must aim for His nature or else be in sin then we will always be in sin, even in heaven. This prove conclusively your position is wrong.

"I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ Jesus." Douay-Rheims Bible.

Yes we do press toward the mark of His character (which is done by following His teachings) but we do not press toward the mark of His nature as that is simply beyond us as creatures.

"But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did." NIV

How can one approach the nature of another by obedience? No the only thing we can approach is their character. Therefore the love of Christ is part of His character, part of His choice, not part of His nature so that His love of creation is forced on Him and He has no choice whereas out love comes by obedience. Can you not see how this is so inconsistent?