Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Divine Mysteries: Exploring the Trinity, Evil, and Human Destiny  /  Why God Permits Evil  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 3
In his “meat cleaver murderer” illustration about his wife Deborah, Bercot distinguishes between “not within her power” and “so contrary to her nature she couldn’t possibly do it”; how does that distinction reshape the way you read scriptures like “God cannot lie,” and where do you still feel the logic strains?
Another way to ask: Bercot says there’s a difference between “not able to do something” and “so unlike someone’s nature they would never do it.” How does that change how you read verses like “God cannot lie,” and where does the idea still feel shaky?

Direct Answer Bercot’s distinction reframes “God cannot lie” as a statement about God’s character, not a statement that God lacks the capacity of will; God always chooses good because evil is utterly against His nature. The logic can still strain because it sounds like “could” and “couldn’t” are being used in two senses, which may feel like a “distinction without a difference.”

Support from Transcript:

  • He anticipates the objection: “what about… scriptures that say… God cannot lie… God cannot be tried” and says the early Christians “definitely believe those verses.”
  • His illustration: he can say Deborah “could not possibly” be the murderer, yet that doesn’t mean “she doesn’t have the power to do it… sure… she could go out and do it… but… so contrary to her nature.”
  • He applies it to God: “it’s in that sense that God always does good… we can even say God cannot do evil… not saying that it’s not within His power… but… contrary to His nature.”
  • He admits the pushback: “you may be… saying… what’s the difference… sounds like a distinction without any difference.”
  • He ties the distinction to evil’s existence: without it, you “don’t ever comprehend why God permits evil.”
Discussion Follow-ups Does this help you read “cannot” passages as moral certainty rather than limitation? What questions remain about whether true freedom requires a real option of evil?

Jumpstarter 3 of 10
Back Questions Next