ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

What's the matter Cletie, can't you frame an argument against God's sovereignty without misrepresenting it??

Do you think god will let you escape judgement for bearing false witness against His word???????????????????????????????????

I think you are one question mark short.

Had you added one more question mark maybe we would got your point.

Uh... Rolf... Z Man... why are you Calvinist types so incredibly rude?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Z Man

When did I ever claim that God does morally wrong things? What can God do that is morally wrong? What have I said God does which makes Him responsible for being 'wrong'?

Oh man... Z Man... you really seem to be hopelessly lost within your own twisted theology.

I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume there must be some sort of misunderstanding.

Review the following statements that I believe to represent your view based on everything you have stated on this thread..... please tell me where you disagree.

1. God decrees all things. Every action, every movement, every event for all of history has been decreed by God.

2. Therefore... every morally sinful thing that has ever happened has been decreed by God.

3. God Himself cannot do anything that is morally wrong.

It seems to me the obvious logical conclusion of the above three statements is that NO morally sinful act has every occurred.

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by Z Man

Wrong. We believe that God punishes people specifically and only for the purpose of His glory. In fact, that's the only reason He has created anything, both the wicked and the good. No one believes that God punishes people specifically just to punish them, as if He likes doing it.

Look, I'm not saying that Calvinist sit down and figure out their lesson plans for Sunday school and include things like, "God is arbitrary".
When phrased that way, no one would agree with it. But that is effectively what you guys believe. You believe that what Hitler did (for an extreme example) wasn't done because Hitler chose to do it but because Hitler was chosen (predestined) to do it. Or even if you say that he chose to do it, you would in the same breath say that he was predestined to choose it so either way is fine with me. One way he didn't choose the other way the word choose is meaningless. Any way you slice it, his punishment for sins that he had no choice but to commit, is unjust and arbitrary.

Your assumption that God only 'punishes' the 'bad' people is elementary logic. Surely Job was a righteous man in the eyes of God; David's firstborn son was killed by God, although his son had done nothing wrong; God hated Esau before he was born; God has killed several women and children that lived in nations and cities that opposed Israel; Jesus Himself was an innocent man, yet ordained by God to be 'slained' for His glory.

Are you openly saying that God is unjust? Is that really your position?

So what if they are? It doesn't mean that they aren't responsible for their sins. Jesus told Peter that he was going to deny Him three times that night, and sure enough, that's what Peter did. Afterwards, Peter wept bitterly. He knew he was guilty. He didn't say, "Well Lord, You did foreknow that I was going to sin, thus it was going to happen and I had no free will, so I can't be responsible for denying you". Of course he didn't; Peter wept. He was grieved and sorry for his own wrong doing.

Jesus' ability to predict the actions of Peter in no way proves or even suggests that those actions where predestined by God. If given the right circumstances and sufficient information I can predict what you will do and I don't even know you very well at all and I am certainly not as smart as God! God (Jesus) knew Peter better than He knew himself and he knew all of the people around him including the people outside the court. It simply would not have been difficult at all for God to predict and then orchestrate such an event without even thinking about overcoming anyone's free will.

You scoff at the idea that man is held responsible if everything is decreed by God, but Paul reminds us that we are mere mortals. Who are we to talk back to God? Clete, you're just a man. And even though all of your actions were foreknown and ordained by God, you are still responsible for them. Being just a man, you look foolish declaring that it is unfair of God to do such a thing. Who do you think you are to judge God?

I am not judging the real God; I am judging the false stone idol of Calvinism.
Why do you cling so tightly to interpretations of Scripture that not only paint God as an arbitrary tyrant, but that are not necessary interpretations of the text? Paul is not talking about individual people, he is speaking of nations. He was explaining how God cut off Israel and why He was justified in doing so because of their unbelief. This interpretation is not only consistent with the language and grammar of the text but it is further backed up by Paul's reference to Jer. 18 which explicitly states this point in no uncertain terms. It is further backed up by the fact that one doesn't have to believe God to be unjust in order not to have a problem with this text.

Romans 9:18-20
So you see, God shows mercy to some just because he wants to, and he chooses to make some people refuse to listen. Well then, you might say, "Why does God blame people for not listening? Haven't they simply done what he made them do?" No, don't say that. Who are you, a mere human being, to criticize God?

This is simply the worst translation of this text I have ever seen. It is the most blatant example of the translators reading the theology into the text that I have ever seen. Are you sure that the Bible you're getting this from isn't a paraphrase? Look it up yourself in a lexicon or in Strong's or something. This is simply a near complete mistranslation of the Greek.

You declare God unjust for doing as He pleases? Can He not create people for destruction, if He so wills to? Can He not save whomever He wishes, in order to show the world through them that He is love and merciful and glorious? Can He not create the wicked for the day of punishment, to show the world His judgment and hatred against all that oppose Him, and in turn, to display His glory?

Not arbitrarily He can't no. God cannot be unjust Z Man! He can't do it! HE CAN'T DO IT. Any interpretation of the Bible you come up with that suggests otherwise is false. God cannot violate His own nature, period.

Again, who are you to render accusations against God for His sovereign choices? Who are you to judge God?

Again, I do not judge the true and living God who created the universe, loves me and gave Himself for me. I do however judge the false pagan god of the Greeks who cannot change, and who decrees what I will and will not do without my input and then punishes or rewards me based on those unchosen actions.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Z Man
Again, who are you to render accusations against God for His sovereign choices? Who are you to judge God?

Remind me again who is accusing God of decreeing the Holocaust, 9-11, etc etc etc? And remind me again who is judging that God orchestrates EVERY action, EVERY disease, EVERY sickness, EVERY rape, EVERY murder and EVERY death for all of time?

 

[Poly]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Look, I'm not saying that Calvinist sit down and figure out there lesson plans for Sunday school and include things like, "God is arbitrary".
When phrased that way, no one would agree with it. But that is effectively what you guys believe. You believe that what Hitler did (for an extreme example) wasn't done because Hitler chose to do it but because Hitler was chosen (predestined) to do it. Or even if you say that he chose to do it, you would in the same breath say that he was predestined to choose it so either way is fine with me.

Calvinists believe that to say man has complete free will and in the same breath say that God is in complete control of man's will, makes them pleasing to God as if He delights in them being contrary. They themselves know it makes no sense but it's as if they feel that by accepting this absurdity, it shows that they have great faith. Faith that something so obviously illogical will somehow be made logical one day. The problem is, the God we see in the bible is logical. Men come along with this irrational doctrine and expect others to believe that it is from God who is nothing but rational.

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

Clete used to be a calvinist. he knows what he is talking about.

Is this true, Clete? If so was it not one of the best occurances ever, in your life, to finally realize the truth?

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

Clete used to be a calvinist. he knows what he is talking about.

Originally posted by Poly
Is this true, Clete? If so was it not one of the best occurrences ever, in your life, to finally realize the truth?

Yep! It's true. I was a big five pointer! If you think Z Man is hard core, he doesn’t have anything on me, I could argue circles around just about anyone. That is until Bob came along and blew my spiritual doors off!

When I came to understand the truth, it was sort of rough actually. It's no fun making the realization that you've spent so much energy on something so completely false! And it wasn't just Calvinism; Nearly everything I believed about Christianity and about God in general had to be revised or totally rejected along with it. The very, very basic basics remained but even they had a different flavor to them. It was as if I had been on a different planet! Everything changed.
The most important and striking difference is the realization that God is a real person with real feelings who wants genuinely to have a personal love relationship specifically and individually with me and that it really does do damage to that relationship when I sin and God gets His feelings hurt over me. Try to beat that for a motivation for righteous living!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Rolf Ernst]

G. I. T.--No Clete doesn't know what he is talking about because he grossly misrepresents Reformed doctrine; but, of course, since you are an enemy of those truths, you gladly take the word of the ill-informed who misrepresent as the straight skinny on the issue.

 

[Turbo]

Last year at this time, G_I_T rejected the Open View.

 

[Poly]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Yep! It's true. I was a big five pointer! If you think Z Man is hard core, he doesn’t have anything on me, I could argue circles around just about anyone. That is until Bob came along and blew my spiritual doors off!

When I came to understand the truth, it was sort of rough actually. It's no fun making the realization that you've spent so much energy on something so completely false! And it wasn't just Calvinism; Nearly everything I believed about Christianity and about God in general had to be revised or totally rejected along with it. The very, very basic basics remained but even they had a different flavor to them. It was as if I had been on a different planet! Everything changed.
The most important and striking difference is the realization that God is a real person with real feelings who wants genuinely to have a personal love relationship specifically and individually with me and that it really does do damage to that relationship when I sin and God gets His feelings hurt over me. Try to beat that for a motivation for righteous living!

Resting in Him,
Clete

That is so awesome! I was also raised a hardcore 5 pointer. Here is my testamony on how I came to see the truth. I'd be curious to know if you could relate to any of the things that I wrote in this confession. I can't tell you what it was like to finally see the truth (also with Bob's help). I owe much of the peace I have in my life to finally coming to a realization that what I had founded my beliefs on was not of God and finally seeing Him as the Living God.

 

[Rolf Ernst]

I wonder why the OVers and Arminians are NEVER able to understand the concept stated very clearly in Scripture that God by His common grace, as He governs the world, often restrains the wicked from the evil deeds of their own nature; but at times, when His longsuffering is at an end, He gives them up to walk in their own ways and wicked works (which they quickly do) and then executes judgement upon them for their rebellion.

Those acts of rebellion He turns to His own holy and just end--"even the wrath of man shall praise thee"--but He then exacts vengeance on them because their motive in their deeds was not to serve God, but to do evil. This is VEERRRYYY simple. It is not at all complex, yet they TWIST the Scripture, REFUSING to praise God for the holy and just cause which He fulfills in the disobedience of the wicked. Instead, they can only appreciate the evil intent of the wicked in whatever came to pass; and they TOTALLY IGNORE AND REFUSE TO PRAISE GOD FOR the HOLY AND JUST PURPOSE WHICH HE FULFILLED EVEN AS THE WICKED STRUGGLED AGAINST HIM.

Not only so, but THEY insist on charging God with the guilt of the wicked simply because His eternal purpose, which is always holy and just and good, involved the use wicked instruments.

Scripture is literally replete with instances of this happening. Yet, will THEY realize that God, by the power of His mighty arm, achieved His holy purpose in spite of all the attempts of wicked and evil men to defeat Him? Will they EVER realize that? EVER? Don't count on it. Their focus is set upon some being OTHER THAN GOD. Never will they confess God's victory over the forces of darkness. No, they much prefer to ascribe wickedness to God. But the testimony of Scripture stands against them for all eternity.

"Even the wrath of man shall praise thee, and the remainder of wrath, you will restrain."

Will THEY ever be part of the chorus that praises God for the works He executes even through the wrath of man?? Don't hold you breath, because "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven." And it is very clear that God, to this point, has not been pleased to enlighten their understanding.

This is SOOO plain and simple. So simple, as a mater of fact, that its very simplicity is PROOF that a spiritual truth, no matter how simple, cannot be received by a man "except it be given him from heaven."

 

[Hilston]

This is a long-overdue response to Clete Pfeiffer's post of 06-03-2004 05:02 PM (Post #479)

Jim asked: How do people accept Christ? Out of their evil nature?

Clete writes: What does this question even mean? Do you not understand what it means to have a evil nature? It does not mean that people are completely incapable of doing anything that isn't evil it just means that that's what they do most of the time; it's what comes most naturally.

Would you say it is a natural thing for people to love other people?

Jim wrote: Let me see if I understand your logic. Roughly 3,000 people died on 9/11. Let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that God's secret intervention could have prevented the deaths of 2,750 of them. Let's further suppose that 500 of those people were already believers. That leaves 2,250 unsaved people who may become believers or may become more evil than they were before. Let's say only one person out of 2,250 becomes a believer as an indirect result of his life being prolonged by God's intervention. 2,249 people end up in hell, but one is saved who otherwise would have perished. Wouldn't it be worth God's effort to save that one, even if the vast majority end up in hell? Isn't that one person's soul of value to God?

Clete writes: It would cost more in the end Hilston as God would have to end the human race in order to do what you suggest. We live in an evil world and evil things happen. If God wanted to stop all the evil that happens then it would require ending the world, which is precisely what He will do one day.

This is what I mean by seeming to dodge the question. I'm not saying you are, but it appears that way. That said, DIDN'T I ALREADY STIPULATE SEVERAL TIMES THAT NOT ALL EVIL WOULD HAVE TO BE STOPPED? DIDN'T I ALREADY STIPULATE SEVERAL TIMES THAT GOD WOULD SECRETLY STOP ONLY CERTAIN KIND OF EVIL THAT A LOVING OPEN VIEW GOD WOULD BE EXPECTED TO STOP (FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF SAVING AS MANY PEOPLE AS STATISTICALLY POSSIBLE)? DID YOU REALLY MISS THAT PART? OR DID YOU DELIBERATELY IGNORE THAT PART? OR DO YOU JUST HAVE A BAD MEMORY?

Clete writes: Further, how do you know that your hypothetical hasn't already happened?

I don't believe it has because it's not consistent with my understanding of scripture. But are you now saying that this might have happened according to your view?

Clete writes: Do you see my point? Your hypothetical secret workings of God behind the scenes makes no sense to even discuss because if He did do it you wouldn't even be able to tell!

That's not the question. The question is: Does this fit into your theology? You've denied it up to this point.

Jim wrote: Are you saying that God's desire to diminish the evil that men do outweighs His desire to save them?

Clete writes: No. I'm saying that what you suggest cannot be done and still have the existence of this evil world make any sense.

DIDN'T I ALREADY STIPULATE SEVERAL TIMES THAT NOT ALL EVIL WOULD HAVE TO BE STOPPED? DIDN'T I ALREADY STIPULATE SEVERAL TIMES THAT GOD WOULD SECRETLY STOP ONLY CERTAIN KIND OF EVIL THAT A LOVING OPEN VIEW GOD WOULD BE EXPECTED TO STOP (FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF SAVING AS MANY PEOPLE AS STATISTICALLY POSSIBLE)?

Look, Clete, these discussions are difficult enough without having to rehash things that have already been established. I know I miss things at times, and maybe you really did miss it every time I made this point. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and I'm hoping we can make progress henceforth, because I really want to understand your view on this.

Clete writes: You seem to think that life is some sort of game that God is playing. It is not!

But it seems to me that it is your view that makes God out to be a game-player. On the Open View, He sits idly by and watches as thousands of people plunge into hell, when He could have prolonged a few of those lives in the hope that they might later believe in Him. But because of certain rules of the Open View game, He won't lift a finger.

Please help me to better understand this.

Sincerely,
Jim

 

[Poly]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

I wonder why the OVers and Arminians are NEVER able to understand the concept stated very clearly in Scripture that God by His common grace, as He governs the world, often restrains the wicked from the evil deeds of their own nature;

Restrains? God restrains them from doing the wickedness that He planned in advance for them to do. :freak:

but at times, when His longsuffering is at an end, He gives them up to walk in their own ways and wicked works (which they quickly do) and then executes judgement upon them for their rebellion.

Longsuffering? Maybe if He wouldn't have planned for them to do wickedness He wouldn't get so impatient.
Gives them up to their walk in their own ways....? Don't you mean He gives them up to walk in the way he predestined them to?

Those acts of rebellion He turns to His own holy and just end, but He then exacts vengeance on them because their motive in their deeds was not to serve God.

But their motive was to do just as God predestined them to do. He exacts vengeance on them for perfectly obeying His will. :hammer:

This is VEERRRYYY simple.

:kookoo:

 

[Turbo]

Earth to Rolf:

OVers do not believe that God is guilty of forcing men to do evil, or even tempting them to do evil.

• Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. James 1:13-14

But we do point out that Calvinists ultimately believe that God decrees every wicked act, since Calvinists teach that everything is preplanned and predestined, decreed from God.

 

[drbrumley]

Look, I'm not saying that Calvinist sit down and figure out their lesson plans for Sunday school and include things like, "God is arbitrary".
When phrased that way, no one would agree with it. But that is effectively what you guys believe. You believe that what Hitler did (for an extreme example) wasn't done because Hitler chose to do it but because Hitler was chosen (predestined) to do it. Or even if you say that he chose to do it, you would in the same breath say that he was predestined to choose it so either way is fine with me. One way he didn't choose the other way the word choose is meaningless. Any way you slice it, his punishment for sins that he had no choice but to commit, is unjust and arbitrary.

Exactly!!!!!!!!!

Either Hitler was predestined for this or he was not.

It is amazing Calvanists subscribe to this, and lo and behold in the same breath, say this is not what they beleive. Help me out here ZMan and Rolf.

 

[Rolf Ernst]

In post 562 on page #38, Knight quotes a question Z Man poses:

"Surely god does decree everything! Why do our thoughts have to be included to mean everything?"

That was a good question, but Knight responds to it with an insulting smilie.

Z Man's question was appropriate because our thoughts are NOT aslways part of God's decree. I am not engaging in some shuck and jive to evade ANY OV/Arminian objection. The Westminster Confession, the most widely recognized authority on Reformed doctrine states very clearly: "God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain
WHATSOEVER COMES TO PASS." That eliminates everything which He does not allow to come to fruition, just as His decrees--those things He has ordained--are declared to be: "the wise, free and holy acts of the counsel of His will, whereby, fromall eternity, he has, for his own glory, unchangeably foreordainewd whatsoever COMES TO PASS IN TIME, especially concerning angels and men."

Men may PURPOSE evil, they may counsel together and make plans, (Ps.33:10,11) but if He has not decreed those schemes, He "brings the counsel of the nations to NOTHING. He makes the plans of the peoples of no effect." and "The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of His heart to all generations." "The LORD has purposed, and who can annul it. His hand is stretched out and who can turn it back?" OOPS! There goes the OVer's Disney World.

 

[Rolf Ernst]

DrBrumley, Post 614--What is missing from your calculation is a PROPER orientation to God's decree involving Hitler: the fact that God has the right to bring judgement upon the earth for its wickedness. Your orientation is not Godward, but toward evil, and the works of evil men.

If you are unable to understand how God through His decree involving Hitler was executing judgement and getting glory to Himself by executing judgement on him, that does not change Him in the least. The Bible says He gives no account to men of His actions, and man's understanding or comprehending is not at all required for Him to execute His holy and wise purpose from everlasting.

But wicked men will focus upon evil and will not praise Him nor recognize His holy and just purpose as the scripture directs them to: "Even the wrath of man shall praise thee and the remainder of wrath you will restrain."

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Big Finn, Post #567--You say that you draw the conclusion from my post that I am saying God will act outside of the bounds of His character--

Boy, big Finn, what a stretch. I never said or thought any such thing. Maybe you don't understand "the bounds of His character."

Listen. LISTEN!! Are you there, ALL there? IT IS NOT OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF GOD'S CHARACTER TO EXECUTE JUDGEMENT ON THE WICKED BY GIVING THEM UP TO THEIR OWN WAYS AND GET GLORY TO HIMSELF BY DEMONSTRATING HIS JUST WRATH AGAINST THEM.

If you can't get that, don't blame either me or God. Do you understand?? It is veerryy simple, really-- just focus on God rather than devote your attention toward evil. Try!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Big Finn, Post #582--You say that OVers and aminians believ that God reigns. That is definitely NOT so. Both of them believe that men can frustrate God's purposes. THAT DOES not QUALIFY AS A REIGN THE WAY SCRIPTURE DEFINES IT.

 

[Clete]

Jim,

Firstly; Yes it is perfectly natural for mothers to love their own children (for example), whether they are believers or not.

Now, on to the primary issue…

I am not dodging any questions. On the contrary, I understand via past experience with you that you respect an honest answer and that is what I have attempted to give you.
You keep saying that you have already stipulated that God would not have to end all the evil in the world to which my response should be intuitive based upon what I've already said. Yes God would have to stop it all for this world we live in to make any sense at all and even if (hypothetically speaking) He did somehow find a way to stop only the worst of it then we wouldn't be able to tell that He had, given the limitations you've put on your own hypothetic which makes the whole subject meaningless to begin with.

If you feel like I am not answering the questions that you are asking then perhaps you shouldn't ask questions that are obviously leading without giving some indication of where you intend to take them. In other words, why the crap does it matter whether or not God intervenes to stop terrorist attacks? What possible implication could come from my answer to that question that would have anything to do with whether or not the future has been predestined? Where is this line of questioning going? What point are you trying to make?
You want to know whether God intervening to stop 9-11 would fit in my theological worldview. NO, it wouldn't. But that's sort of the obvious answer isn't it? God obviously didn't intervene to stop 9-11 because it did happen. You indicated that it doesn't fit into your theology either, so we are in agreement, right? Well except for the fact that you believe that God predestined 9-11 and I believe that it pissed God off, if you'll excuse the expression.

But it seems to me that it is your view that makes God out to be a game-player. On the Open View, He sits idly by and watches as thousands of people plunge into hell, when He could have prolonged a few of those lives in the hope that they might later believe in Him. But because of certain rules of the Open View game, He won't lift a finger.

Please help me to better understand this.

What is so hard to understand about my position on this, Jim? I'm sure that my frustration is apparent but I don't want for you to think I'm upset so much with you as I am simply frustrated with your manner of questioning. If I understand you correctly you wish for us to arrive at the conclusion you have in mind together without your having to spell it out for me. You feel that this is not only an effective method of debate but an effective manner of instruction as well. The problem is Jim; I have no desire to be discipled by you. Not that I'm apposed to learning whatever there is to learn from whatever source presents itself, including you. I'm just saying that I am not your student and I resent having to attempt to read your mind in order to figure out where you're going with a line of questioning.
If I have misunderstood you intent, I apologize in advance and will ask for you to explain what it is that you are doing so that we can be on the same page. I sincerely agree with you in that I want to have a productive conversation, especially if you feel like there is an important point that needs to be fleshed out. I just don't want for us to be frustrating the crap out of each other in the process. We really do need to figure out a better way for the two of us to communicate!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Clete, Post #578--Okay, you say 2Sam 24 means exactly what it says:

It says, the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel "and He moved David against them to say, "go number Israel..." Then in verses 12-15, it says that God brought judgement upon David for doing so.

Now you tell me what it means. Reconcile it with OVers often stated belief that if God executes His will through deeds of the wicked or were in anyway involved, it would make Him guilty of sin. Go ahead.