Does God commit sins of omission?

[Luke_K]

If a policeman stood by a woman who was being beaten and raped but did nothing but watch, we would say that policeman was a terrible person because he had the power and opportunity to save this woman from being raped but did nothing.

If a rich man lived in a village of poor, starving people yet did not share any of his wealth with them, we would consider him selfish and sinful.

If a scientist discovered a pill that cured all forms of cancer but kept the knowledge to himself instead of using it to save peoples’ lives, we’d say he was a bad man.

Yet God has the power to save any woman from being raped, just like the policeman. He has the power to give food to any starving person on the planet, just like he did in the Gospel when he fed the five thousand, but he doesn’t. He has the power to cure any disease on the planet, but he doesn’t, just like the scientist who kept the cure to himself.

Why do we believe that if humans don’t do these good things when they can, it’s sinful, but when God doesn’t do these things it’s okay?

 

[callmeChris]

If a policeman stood by a woman who was being beaten and raped but did nothing but watch, we would say that policeman was a terrible person because he had the power and opportunity to save this woman from being raped but did nothing.

If a rich man lived in a village of poor, starving people yet did not share any of his wealth with them, we would consider him selfish and sinful.

If a scientist discovered a pill that cured all forms of cancer but kept the knowledge to himself instead of using it to save peoples’ lives, we’d say he was a bad man.

Yet God has the power to save any woman from being raped, just like the policeman. He has the power to give food to any starving person on the planet, just like he did in the Gospel when he fed the five thousand, but he doesn’t. He has the power to cure any disease on the planet, but he doesn’t, just like the scientist who kept the cure to himself.

Why do we believe that if humans don’t do these good things when they can, it’s sinful, but when God doesn’t do these things it’s okay?

God doesnt, did not and will NEVER sin. He is all good and all light. God is beyond the power of sin. The fact that we think that we should sit back and believe that God should do most of is in a sin of omission at least in my opinion. God works through those who are willing to serve him, and love him daily. Just look at the life of the saints. Look at the those who are doing good in todays society, and Im not saying big government officials and rulers, but people like you and me. Remember God can only do good if we are willing to let him work in and through us.

 

[Julian0404]

Your question assumes that GOD should not allow us to exercise the greatest freedom HE has given us, i.e. the free will to either chose to love and seek GOD or to reject and hate GOD.
Why would HE give us free will, and then take it from us? Yes, men committ terrible sins against humanity, and yes GOD could prevent every single one, but then we would not have free will and we would not be chosing GOD. HE would be forcing us to chose HIM regardless of whether we wanted to or not. That act of “forced love of GOD” would be just as great an evil as those you mention. We would be prisoners and slaves.

A second very important part of your answer is that GOD can and does take the inhumanity that man committs and works it for good.

We will never, in our life on earth understand GOD and all that HE is and how HE thinks, but that does not mean we should lower HIM to our level and make HIM behave like a “human cop” in order to love HIM and find “fairness” in HIM. Fairness is not a term of GOD, it is a human definition applied to games. GOD’s terms are “mercy” or “justice”, and it is through HIS mercy that HE works evil to good. And it is through HIS justice that HE declares “…vengence is MINE sayeth the LORD…” paraphrase.

At the end of our lives, when we stand before GOD, it is our goal to receive HIS mercy, not HIS justice, but we have to “chose” that desire, and live like we have made that choice.

 

[Adam1986]

If a policeman stood by a woman who was being beaten and raped but did nothing but watch, we would say that policeman was a terrible person because he had the power and opportunity to save this woman from being raped but did nothing.

If a rich man lived in a village of poor, starving people yet did not share any of his wealth with them, we would consider him selfish and sinful.

If a scientist discovered a pill that cured all forms of cancer but kept the knowledge to himself instead of using it to save peoples’ lives, we’d say he was a bad man.

Yet God has the power to save any woman from being raped, just like the policeman. He has the power to give food to any starving person on the planet, just like he did in the Gospel when he fed the five thousand, but he doesn’t. He has the power to cure any disease on the planet, but he doesn’t, just like the scientist who kept the cure to himself.

Why do we believe that if humans don’t do these good things when they can, it’s sinful, but when God doesn’t do these things it’s okay?

God doesn’t sin because God makes the rules and sins are broken rules. You can’t break your own rules.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

This is really just random thoughts on my part, but here goes:

Lets say we find out that person A is planning to assassinate someone in two months. It would be good for us to try and stop this, but the method we use is important. We could go find person A and arrest him. We could guard his target. But it would not be cool to capture person A’s family and torture them until he turns himself in. Even if we knew the third method would work and the other two methods (and all other methods) would not, we still could not do the third method.

God could stop person A in any number of ways. But some ways He has deemed out of bounds - either out of respect for the free will He gave us or some other reason we may not understand. God may act through a citizen that just happens to in the vicinity of person A when he’s about to strike, who is capable of stopping the murder, and who has decided to let God act through him in doing good. God could also, of course, simply cause person A to pass out right before he commits his action.

I think God probably occasionally does perform actions of the second type. But consider if He prevented all evils by this method, or even just all evils that could not be prevented by the first method (note of course that He could change the world so that every action could be prevented by the fist method, but this change would essentially be an action along the lines of the second): we would essentially then lose our ability to reject God (as rejection of God is always the evil that leads to our actions against others, and if God prevents all evils…).

God certainly could prevent all evil, either by directly making it impossible or by random natural occurrences happening at the right time, or by some other method. But if He did so, we would essentially no longer be beings with the ability to accept or reject God any more - we would essentially no longer be people in our own right but extensions of God. Of course, we’re supposed to strive to act like extensions of God’s will, but this is supposed to occur because of our cooperation with God rather than God’s coercion of us, and it is the ability to do so, or not, that makes us people rather than something like robots.

So then, if God wants us to remain as free beings, then it makes sense that he would not stop all evils. The only question left is why some and not others, and while that is an interesting question, we shouldn’t be surprised that we can’t always see the answer, as we can’t even see the immediate nature of all evil actions, let alone their eternal consequences. God can.

 

[Luke_K]

Thank you for your replies but my actual question has not been addressed. Why is it that when humans have the power to do good but don’t do it, it’s a sin of omission, but when God has the power to do the same good and doesn’t do it, it’s not wrong? Like with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man was sent to hell because he didn’t share any of his wealth with Lazarus. But neither did God, so why was it not wrong for God to withhold his wealth from Lazarus during Lazarus’ earthly life?

 

[Iron_Donkey]

Thank you for your replies but my actual question has not been addressed. Why is it that when humans have the power to do good but don’t do it, it’s a sin of omission, but when God has the power to do the same good and doesn’t do it, it’s not wrong? Like with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man was sent to hell because he didn’t share any of his wealth with Lazarus. But neither did God, so why was it not wrong for God to withhold his wealth from Lazarus during Lazarus’ earthly life?

What I was getting at but forgot to explicitly say in my previous post is this:

Inaction isn’t always a sin.

Whether or not it is a sin depends on the nature of the action we could take but are not: that is we cannot sin to prevent evil. (So inaction is no sin if the only action we could take would be sin in its own right.) This is the key point really.

For God (leaving aside the idea of God sinning being a questionable concept in itself for now), many of the actions He could do would go against what He has decided is appropriate for Him to do.

That is, many of the ways He could prevent evil would be, if He were to do them, a sin, since a sin is anything God does not deem appropriate. (See previous post for argument that there are times when God would not see it as appropriate to prevent evil.)

So: since it is not a sin to allow evil to come to pass when the only way to prevent it would be to sin, and it would be a sin for God to behave in a way that is contrary to His nature (as well as being a logical impossibility), and since it is further revealed to us that to violate our free will is against His nature (and hence doing so would be a sin), it is not a sin for God to allow evil to come to pass when preventing it would violate our free will.

When it would not violate our free will directly, there may be other reasons why it would be contrary to His nature (and hence sinful) for God to prevent evil that we simply don’t know about. Or we could in fact know the aspect of God’s nature that makes it wrong to prevent a given evil, but simply not understand the evil well enough to know how preventing it would go against God’s nature.

Again, shortest possible version: inaction is not a sin when action would be a sin. Sin is something against God’s nature. Therefore, if preventing an evil would go against His nature, preventing the evil would be a sin, so allowing the evil to happen is not sinful.

(Forgive me if I’m not using words like nature correctly, not educated in this subject so just throwing some thoughts out there.)

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

Without Gods Grace, wouldn’t there be more evil perpetrated? Without the onus being ours, we could not choose freely the good. Without the evil that does happen, we would not be able to judge correctly the value in good nor have true knowledge of evil. Man sins because it is man that fails to accept God Who offers to all the power over the passions we let rule us. God has helped me avoid many, many sins, but not all, and that is totally my fault.

This is not an easy question to answer, but God can with knowledge of Him inside us when we know and interact with Him.

 

[Vince1022]

Thank you for your replies but my actual question has not been addressed. Why is it that when humans have the power to do good but don’t do it, it’s a sin of omission, but when God has the power to do the same good and doesn’t do it, it’s not wrong?

Love.

Free will.

God’s ways are not our ways.

 

[Julian0404]

Thank you for your replies but my actual question has not been addressed. Why is it that when humans have the power to do good but don’t do it, it’s a sin of omission, but when God has the power to do the same good and doesn’t do it, it’s not wrong? Like with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man was sent to hell because he didn’t share any of his wealth with Lazarus. But neither did God, so why was it not wrong for God to withhold his wealth from Lazarus during Lazarus’ earthly life?

It was addressed, your not open to understanding.

 

[Luke_K]

It was addressed, your not open to understanding.

Thank you for taking the time to write a reply, but I disagree that your post adequately answered my question or my examples. No one’s free will is taken away when a person does a good deed for another. If you had a treatment for a child who was dying from malaria, giving him the cure doesn’t affect anyone’s free will.

Should a cop not protect a woman from the rapist because he respects the rapist’s free will to rape her? Should we not set up laws and punishments in society for people involved in abortions because that would impede their free will? We as humans consider it our moral duty to do these things, but for God it is not.
Iron Donkey:

When it would not violate our free will directly, there may be other reasons why it would be contrary to His nature (and hence sinful) for God to prevent evil that we simply don’t know about. Or we could in fact know the aspect of God’s nature that makes it wrong to prevent a given evil, but simply not understand the evil well enough to know how preventing it would go against God’s nature.

Again, shortest possible version: inaction is not a sin when action would be a sin. Sin is something against God’s nature. Therefore, if preventing an evil would go against His nature, preventing the evil would be a sin, so allowing the evil to happen is not sinful.

Preventing evil and suffering is against God’s nature, but not against our nature? That makes it sound like our natures are more good than God’s. It also raises the question of why our consciences tell us that it is our moral duty to help the suffering when we can.

 

[Luke_K]

Without Gods Grace, wouldn’t there be more evil perpetrated? Without the onus being ours, we could not choose freely the good. Without the evil that does happen, we would not be able to judge correctly the value in good nor have true knowledge of evil. Man sins because it is man that fails to accept God Who offers to all the power over the passions we let rule us. God has helped me avoid many, many sins, but not all, and that is totally my fault.

This is not an easy question to answer, but God can with knowledge of Him inside us when we know and interact with Him.

I appreciate your faith in God’s graces. I certainly believe that without Jesus the world would be in much worse shape.

I’m really asking the question of Job here. Why does God, who is all-powerful and wise, let the good suffer, yet our consciences tell us to help those who suffer when we can? I guess that God wants humanity to suffer in this life. It makes us more like himself, like Jesus.

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

I appreciate your faith in God’s graces. I certainly believe that without Jesus the world would be in much worse shape.

I’m really asking the question of Job here. Why does God, who is all-powerful and wise, let the good suffer, yet our consciences tell us to help those who suffer when we can? I guess that God wants humanity to suffer in this life. It makes us more like himself, like Jesus.

Hebrews 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth, he chastiseth; and he scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
As to why, the answer of Job is 42:1 Then Job answered the Lord, …Therefore I have spoken unwisely, and things that above measure exceeded my knowledge.

An answer is available to us in union with Him in prayer and desire, with keeping His commandments. We will then know that *… to them that love God, all things work together unto good, to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints. * Romans 8:28.

 

[Reuben_J]

Thank you for your replies but my actual question has not been addressed. Why is it that when humans have the power to do good but don’t do it, it’s a sin of omission, but when God has the power to do the same good and doesn’t do it, it’s not wrong? Like with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man was sent to hell because he didn’t share any of his wealth with Lazarus. But neither did God, so why was it not wrong for God to withhold his wealth from Lazarus during Lazarus’ earthly life?

Hi.

I thought this had to do with the fall. We were given a place where no suffering could have taken place. Our parents refused it by eating the fruit. And so this is where we are today. The wages of sin is death. God does not interfere with this consequence but true to his character he plans for our salvation. Fortunately or unfortunately the fullness of that salvation can only be experienced after our death.

We are living in a fallen world.

 

[Newbie2]

I’m really asking the question of Job here. Why does God, who is all-powerful and wise, let the good suffer, yet our consciences tell us to help those who suffer when we can? I guess that God wants humanity to suffer in this life. It makes us more like himself, like Jesus.

Ah, here is the crux of the question.

The answer is…

…we don’t know.

Sure, we can talk about how man allowed evil into our nature through Original sin, we can talk about free will, both of which are important, but the bottom line is that we don’t know why God allows bad things to happen to people.

It is, methinks, a matter of faith to believe that while we do not understand the reasons for evil and suffering in our world and in our lives, that it serves some greater purpose, otherwise the Almighty would not allow it.

 

[slywakka250]

I personally think that it is a glaring contradiction that an all loving all powerful God, refuses to intervene when people are suffering.

The free will argument is unconvincing because free will simply becomes the “right” for each of us to suffer as much as we freely choose to suffer; we can even choose to suffer eternally in hell if we are so inclined.

When man fell, man apparently choose to bring suffering into the world. It is very strange how much we seem to enjoy suffering, as to have brought it on ourselves like this.

No good whatsoever comes from the suffering of a soul in hell. So God can’t work all suffering back to good.

But the gift of free will is worth the consequences right?

It troubles me greatly that God’s perfect plan of free will and love seems to require by its very nature of goodness as God’s perfect plan for the universe, a certain amount of suffering, and even souls in hell. For surely God wouldn’t have allowed it, if he didn’t have a good reason for it.

To me though, it just doesn’t seem worth it.

 

[Julian0404]

Thank you for taking the time to write a reply, but I disagree that your post adequately answered my question or my examples. No one’s free will is taken away when a person does a good deed for another. If you had a treatment for a child who was dying from malaria, giving him the cure doesn’t affect anyone’s free will.

Should a cop not protect a woman from the rapist because he respects the rapist’s free will to rape her? Should we not set up laws and punishments in society for people involved in abortions because that would impede their free will? We as humans consider it our moral duty to do these things, but for God it is not.

Preventing evil and suffering is against God’s nature, but not against our nature? That makes it sound like our natures are more good than God’s. It also raises the question of why our consciences tell us that it is our moral duty to help the suffering when we can.

The error upon which you have entered and likewise fail to comprehend is that your question requires the immediate submission of GOD’s powers and therefore the immediate acquisition that GOD is not GOD, but rather GOD is man and subject to all the rules of nature and humanity which GOD has created for man to live within.

I quote you “No one’s free will is taken away when a person does a good deed for another”. This is where you have the disconnect. The statement is true as it relates mano a mano, but it is untrue as it relates mano a DIOS. You cannot hold GOD to the laws of man.
If I do a good deed for you nothing has been lost between the two of us. If, however, as you are questioning as to why GOD does not prevent -all evil - by the “undoing” of with our bad deeds with HIS good deeds then that act by GOD would be the removal of my free will to do an evil deed.

You are not grasping the fact that GOD wants us to come to HIM voluntarily, not by force of HIS good deeds. Recall in the bible when the Pharisee’s requested JESUS to perform “…an act or deed that we may believe…” paraphrase, and JESUS responded, that the only deed they would see would be as Jona in the belly of the whale for 3 days, implying JESUS 3 days in the tomb to arise on the third day.

GOD made the earth and all that was in it good. satan through the sins of Adam/Eve introduced evil and the concept of “bad” into the world, and GOD through HIS SON JESUS returned good to the world for those who will “…eat MY flesh and drink MY blood…”. HE is not forcing us, HE is attempting to “love us” into heaven.

Do not place GOD on the same level as men and ask “why not” or “how come” in challenging GOD’s way ,truth or life. That is the road that satan led Adam/Eve down. It is the road we MUST avoid.

 

[Julian0404]

I personally think that it is a glaring contradiction that an all loving all powerful God, refuses to intervene when people are suffering.

The free will argument is unconvincing because free will simply becomes the “right” for each of us to suffer as much as we freely choose to suffer; we can even choose to suffer eternally in hell if we are so inclined.

When man fell, man apparently choose to bring suffering into the world. It is very strange how much we seem to enjoy suffering, as to have brought it on ourselves like this.

No good whatsoever comes from the suffering of a soul in hell. So God can’t work all suffering back to good.

But the gift of free will is worth the consequences right?

It troubles me greatly that God’s perfect plan of free will and love seems to require by its very nature of goodness as God’s perfect plan for the universe, a certain amount of suffering, and even souls in hell. For surely God wouldn’t have allowed it, if he didn’t have a good reason for it.

To me though, it just doesn’t seem worth it.

You must study your faith. You must read from the Catechism, the bible, listen to teaching CD’s and read the teaching books of the saints.
I quote you " …GOD’s perfect plan…seems to require by its very nature…a certain amount of suffering, and even souls in hell. "
Your statement is truly wrong on so many levels as you are, in your effort to establish a relationship with GOD, bringing HIM down to our level. You are assuming that since you do not understand GOD, that HE is wrong in HIS actions. It is us, you and I who have to struggle with the study and practice of the faith daily, hourly and every minute to attempt to raise our knowledge up toward GOD. Will we ever get there? No, but we should never, never, never lower GOD to mans laws and nature in an attempt to understand HIM.

You are truly on the correct path to Holiness because you express a lack of knowledge that applies you are seeking the answers. Please, keep seeking the truth, as JESUS has told us, “…all who seek find…” paraphrase.

 

[Vince1022]

I personally think that it is a glaring contradiction that an all loving all powerful God, refuses to intervene when people are suffering.

Completely understandable.

I think your reflections on free will warrant further attention.

Of course no good from any soul suffering in hell. Nowhere does the Catholic Church teach or suggest such.

What alternatives would your provide, in theory, for a loving God (as understood by Christians) other than free will?

What would make more sense, or be more beneficial, in your thought?

Thanks.

 

[centurionguard]

If a policeman stood by a woman who was being beaten and raped but did nothing but watch, we would say that policeman was a terrible person because he had the power and opportunity to save this woman from being raped but did nothing.

If a rich man lived in a village of poor, starving people yet did not share any of his wealth with them, we would consider him selfish and sinful.

If a scientist discovered a pill that cured all forms of cancer but kept the knowledge to himself instead of using it to save peoples’ lives, we’d say he was a bad man.

Yet God has the power to save any woman from being raped, just like the policeman. He has the power to give food to any starving person on the planet, just like he did in the Gospel when he fed the five thousand, but he doesn’t. He has the power to cure any disease on the planet, but he doesn’t, just like the scientist who kept the cure to himself.

Why do we believe that if humans don’t do these good things when they can, it’s sinful, but when God doesn’t do these things it’s okay?

…

Hello Luke K;

I’m not here to ridicule your question. Many of the scenarios you give speak of great human suffering which is often a difficult paradox for many, particularly for those who are caught directly in the mist of harsh suffering.

I would lay quadruple bets on any human being caught in great suffering and have a poor prayerful spiritual relationship or doubt in believing in God who would question God’s rational in their own very limited understanding about suffering.

Even a person with strong Faith and devotional love towards God can easily be led down the path of great suffering and forced through the crucible of the Dark Night of the Soul; as a test sent by our loving merciful God to burn out the chaff of human imperfections.

It must be understood in Faith that our beloved God is not an indifferent God.
God never sins by omission. Its impossible because God is full complete expression of perfection.

Human suffering is as much an integral part of life as taking a breath.

**Yet God has the power to save any woman from being raped, just like the policeman. He has the power to give food to any starving person on the planet, just like he did in the Gospel when he fed the five thousand, but he doesn’t. He has the power to cure any disease on the planet, but he doesn’t, just like the scientist who kept the cure to himself.

Why do we believe that if humans don’t do these good things when they can, it’s sinful, but when God doesn’t do these things it’s okay?**

The reason why a women, man, or a child is raped is because rapist have given up their gift of freedom to do good…and choose evil instead.

The reason human beings are starving to death with no shelter, clothing or food is because the greater population in today’s world fails to feed, clothe and shelter their brothers and sisters along with corrupt world governments who choose to lord it over the frail and live off the excess spoils of riches, living beyond their means.

God will not interfere with the evil choices humans make in this life because everybody has the freedom to choose good over evil and vice-versa.

Read about the Eight Beatitudes: newadvent.org/cathen/02371a.htm

God is Perfect in every way. It is humans who choose evil behaviors.

Peace
Chris