When answering this question please take into account:

(1) the manifestation of God's attributes to His rational creatures; and

(2) the specific attributes of God's mercy and justice.

__________________
Tracey McKinney
Trinity Fellowship Church
Richardson, TX

"We aim at God's glory when we are content to be outshined by others in gifts and esteem, so that his glory may be increased." Thomas Watson

Just look around at the world. We need to be reminded of what we already know - and often! Good question.

__________________
Austin
EE student at Texas State University
Member of Church of the Cross (PCA) in San Marcos, TX
Ps. 8:3-4 "When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?"

Mr. McKinney,

I would like to respond, but wanted to ask a few questions:

1. What do you mean by necessity? Do you mean to say that necessity binds anyone who is rational?

2. Are you envisioning other worlds with rational creatures, such as space aliens?

Cheers,

__________________
Adam B., Wine Country, California, PCA

"I fear not to hold with Junius, de Politia Mosis cap. 6, that he who was punishable by death under that Judicial law, is punishable by death still; and he who was not punished by death then, is not to be punished by death now."

I'm also confused by your question. Can you be more clear? Are you asking whether it was necessary for God to decree sin in order to bring about His purposes? Are you asking instead something about rational creatures and their capacity to freely choose good? What's the question behind the question?

__________________
Todd K. Pedlar
member, First Congregational Church, (CCCC) Cresco, IA
http://inprincipiodeus.solideogloria.com
http://puritanwisdom.blogspot.com

"As God did not at first choose you because you were high, He will not now forsake you because you are low."
John Flavel in Keeping the Heart



Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

"Necessary"--meaning that in the end, God's rational creatures would get the most complete (as they are able to bear) manifestation of all His attributes.

"Rational"-- meaning any being that has the capacity to ponder and reason about spiritual things.

Hope that helps.

-----Added 9/19/2009 at 03:09:12 EST-----

If God is going to create a world of rational creatures, would He so choose a world to create that would ensure that His rational creatures get the fullest picture of who He is; and therefore, would a decree of sin necessarily lead to that with respect to His mercy and justice?

I believe I misunderstood the question. Sorry about that. I thought you were asking whether God needed to reveal his decrees of what is sin to us, given that we would already know right from wrong. Nevermind!

Todd I added something to my earlier post that might clarify your confusion.

God chose to create the world He created. I'm not sure speculation about other worlds of rational creatures is very helpful. He decreed sin, indeed He decrees everything whatsoever that comes to pass - and has ultimately a central purpose of displaying His glory and attributes. His mercy and justice are displayed in part (not in full, but in part) because of the decree of the Fall and so forth. He has done what He deemed in the good pleasure of His will to do - and His glory and His glorious attributes are thereby displayed. I think we ought to rest in that and not try to go further than Scripture goes. That is, trying to figure out whether this is in some sense absolutely necessary in some fictional "other world" is, I think, akin to speculating about the number of angels on the head of a pin.

Todd,

The only reason I bring this up is because some people believe that Christianity is not necessary and that God could have created a world where His mercy and justice would not be on display. If those attributes are not on display in that world, then wouldn't that be a less than ideal picture of who God is with respect to the revelation of His nature?

It is not necessary that God create. He is self-sufficient. Yet, having determined to create, all created things/relations are necessary according to that determination. To ask if God could have done other than He has done is also to ask if God could have wanted it differently (i.e. God wanted other than to bring about His utmost glory in creation), which is really to ask about a different God entirely.

__________________
Joshua Butcher
PCA
College Station, TX

Okay, well, yes, of course it would be less than ideal... and it would be one in which God would not be able in the same way to show His attributes of justice and mercy.

But that's not your friend's problem (I assume you're not dealing in an absolute hypothetical here). Your friend will very likely find no more compulsion to accept that the problems of God's ability to display his attributes in this "less than ideal world" has any bearing on whether he should or should not believe Christianity is "necessary" than before you bring this explanation to him. There are deeper issues with his or her understanding than the necessity of a decree of sin.

Absolutely! But when He freely chose to create, what world would bring about the greatest manifestation of His glorious attributes? I would say that this world in which we live would. Another world where His mercy and justice are not on display would seem to me to be a less than ideal world for God to manifest his glory to, by, and upon His rational creatures; and therefore, back to my original question--Is sin a necessary decree to bring about this? If yes, then doesn't that prove the necessity of Christianity?

-----Added 9/19/2009 at 04:00:43 EST-----

I've noticed that some people on the PB do not believe in the necessity of Christianity. If there are any responses to this I would like to see them.

Tracey, seeking for some ground in God that requires that He decree just what He decreed in effect denies the freedom of His will. In deciding to glorify Himself, God doesn't submit to a necessity, and I think that trying to figure out what He could decree to glorify Himself most is a dead end.

Perhaps this quote from Heppe's Reformed Dogmatics will make the point.

__________________
Ruben
Moderator
F.P.C.I.
Indiana

Vanities and disguises have covered us, and thereby we are naked; licenciousness hath inflam'd us, and thereby we are frozen; voluptuousness hath fed us, and thereby we are sterved, the fancies and traditions of men have taught and instructed us, and thereby we are ignorant.
John Donne

Board Rules - Signature Requirements - Suggestions?

Calvinistas Conversando
Teología en Mexico
The Howling Wilderness

1) What do you mean by "the necessity of Christianity"?

2) By what means do you assess that there are some here who deny the necessity of Christianity?

3) What good end is served by speculating about the reasons God does what He does in the good pleasure of His will? This kind of speculation is exactly what Calvin calls "foolish and idle talk".

When Adam asked above what I meant by "necessity" with respect to the decree of sin I wrote: Mercy and justice are two of God's means of communicating His glory to His sinful creatures. If there is no sin, then there is no mercy or justice manifested. If there is no mercy or justice manifested, then God would have two less means of communicating His glory. So therefore, mankind would never know of God's mercy in pardoning love nor of His judicial anger against sin--and as I said before, that would be a less than ideal world for the manifestation of God's holy nature because two of His attributes would not be manifested.

Where I am going with all of this is to show that Christianity is necessary for that end--that is, the end where all of God's most holy and glorious attributes are on display before redeeemed and condemned creatures.

Good question. What brought this thread on was a discussion in the forum related to the discussion of apologetical methods (i.e. presuppositional vs. evidential approaches). The title of the thread was "against fundamentalist presuppositionalism." One of the comments in that forum was to knock down the presuppositional approach by arguing against the "necessity of Christianity." The thread has been abandoned for about a month and I felt that the issue brought up there was worthy of a whole new thread of discussion by itself. Now if the moderators believe I have erred by opening up a new thread, then I apologize and maybe we can move it over there to that forum if they agree that is best. I made the judgment, probably poorly, that it was very worthy of a new discussion.

Notice, Todd, that I have not given any more "reasons" for saying what I have said other than the glory of God. What we can say is that whatever God does is first and foremost for His own glory, so there is no speculation there. I understand that God has other purposes for doing what He does, and I am not prying into those purposes. I am only interested here with God's glory.

I would think that whatever God has decreed is necessary in that His omniscience and holiness implies that whatever He does is the highest and best of all possibilities.

__________________
Brad
Member- Eagle Heights PCA
Winchester, VA

Pro 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

The issue with that, Brad, is that God was perfectly free not to create. Would that have been less good? Well, God would still have been perfectly blessed, so what would have been worse about it? Infinite goodness would still be the case.

Ah, brother, but then we tread into the area of conjecture, do we not? Yes, God was free not to create, but doesn't the fact that He did imply that any other reality would have been less perfect, in light of His own perfection? Aren't the actions of a perfect God always only perfect?

Maybe that's something I'll have to consider - that there are alternate directions that perfection can take and still remain perfect; but of all possible realities, wouldn't whatever course God has chosen of necessity be the highest and best?

I think the dilemma is taken away when we bear in mind that no cause can be assigned for the will of God, and that God's will is the standard of good.
God wills - because He wills, not on account of anything else. His will is free.
He willed this, so this is best. But there was no necessity for Him to will this, no metaphysical constraint. This is best because God willed it, but I think it would be speculative is to say that God willed because it is best.
I don't believe this is actually conjecture at all, but merely the application of Ephesians 1:11. Why does God do what He does? The good pleasure of His will. That is the only answer that can be rendered, and all the answer we need.

Calvin's words on this point are of value.

Institutes, I, 14, 1 & III, 23, 2

Read my post again. Because God creates according to His desire, and God's desires are essential to God's being, for Him to desire something else would mean a different God entirely.

Because God desired what now is, all that now is, is necessary according to His desire. Not only Christianity, but everything--even the most heinous and unthinkable sin.

Christianity is not necessary in order for God to demonstrate his attributes in any way different that all other things are necessary because God has desired it so.