ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Rolf Ernst
New member
Emohaslove--You can make that statement ONLY by refusing to acknowledge that God's motivations are always holy and pure in all His decrees and following providences--even those which involve the evil deeds of those whom He uses as instruments.
You people have a real blasphemous practice of ascribing to God the same evil intent that drives the wicked as God uses them as instruments in the fulfilling of His ever holy decrees and providences.
It is never acceptable to YOU to confess that God is holy and just in all His decrees. Instead, just because He fulfills His holy purpose by men whose intent is only evil, YOU INSIST IN SMEARING GOD WITH THE SAME EVIL WHICH RESIDES IN THE HEART OF THE WICKED AS hE USES THEM FOR HIS JUST PURPOSES.
Your Arminian heresy will not allow you to confess the truth, because you must hang onto your fantasy that God is not sovereign.
You people have a real blasphemous practice of ascribing to God the same evil intent that drives the wicked as God uses them as instruments in the fulfilling of His ever holy decrees and providences.
It is never acceptable to YOU to confess that God is holy and just in all His decrees. Instead, just because He fulfills His holy purpose by men whose intent is only evil, YOU INSIST IN SMEARING GOD WITH THE SAME EVIL WHICH RESIDES IN THE HEART OF THE WICKED AS hE USES THEM FOR HIS JUST PURPOSES.
Your Arminian heresy will not allow you to confess the truth, because you must hang onto your fantasy that God is not sovereign.
God_Is_Truth
New member
Rolf, no one is denying that God is sovereign. we just disagree on what that means.
If Calvinism is true His motivations cannot be holy, that's the whole point. If I set up a situation in which my daughter cannot obey me and then I punish her for her disobedience, am I good father or a sick sociopathic wacko?
If God has decreed that I will sin (say blaspheming Him by suggesting that He has unholy intentions for example) and then I do that which He decreed because there was no other course of action that I could possibly have taken because of His absolute sovereignty, and then God punishes me for that action, then God is unjust by definition.
So, not only does the concept of love make Calvinism impossible, as I argued on this thread before, but the concept of justice, which of course is related to love, has the same effect. The point being, the most fundamental concepts that are present in the Christian faith make what you believe absolutely and utterly impossible. They are, in fact, mutually exclusive.
USES? That's not what Calvinism teaches, that's what Open Theism teaches! God uses and manipulates His enemies and helps His allies in many ways throughout the Scripture. But He does not do so to the degree that their freewill is not fully intact.
Not so! God is absolutely holy and just and therefore the decrees which you ascribe to Him cannot be true. If they were He would be neither holy nor just, that's the point.
No. You have it backward again. Are you sure you're not an Open Theist?
I am not an Arminian, nor do I deny God's sovereignty. I just use the normal meaning of the word sovereign instead of the whacked out Calvinist version of the word. To be sovereign, as I have explained many times, does not mean that a person is in control of absolutely every single detail of every single event that occurs. That is not what the word means, its just not. God is the highest authority that exists. All authority that does exists was delegated by God and can be recalled by Him at any time. There is no appeal beyond God; His judgment is final and binding. For all these reasons and more, God is sovereign by definition.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited by a moderator:
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Clete,
Well, let's examine that...
Then did God know about the possibility of the cross, when he created the world, according to the Open View?
If so, how would you explain that God, knowing this, created it?
Not if the motives can be different!
Genesis 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.
I believe that people get involved in evil, through their motives. God does influence peoples' motives, but I don't think we have to insist that God is the primary cause, the source, of evil motives.
Well, again, I think the tendency is to view the end of the process, when love can be freely given, and not the start of the process, where a person must be loved first, in order to love God and others. Salvation is a birth! Not a marriage…
And justice is served, if God has a motive for good, a good purpose, which he can bring about, without fail.
Job 23:10 But he knows the way that I take; when he has tested me, I will come forth as gold.
How is that unjust? To refine a person, a fire is needed.
Then how can God make predictions, that involve human choices, if human free will is left fully intact?
Romans 9:27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved."
Romans 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob."
How can either of these predictions be certain, if people have full exercise of a free will?
Yes, but he won't do that now, according to the Open View. In the warfare worldview, events can cross God's will, frustrate his purpose, and thwart his best plans to save someone.
How is that being truly sovereign, at this moment?
Blessings,
Lee
Well, let's examine that...
Then did God know about the possibility of the cross, when he created the world, according to the Open View?
If so, how would you explain that God, knowing this, created it?
Not if the motives can be different!
Genesis 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.
I believe that people get involved in evil, through their motives. God does influence peoples' motives, but I don't think we have to insist that God is the primary cause, the source, of evil motives.
Well, again, I think the tendency is to view the end of the process, when love can be freely given, and not the start of the process, where a person must be loved first, in order to love God and others. Salvation is a birth! Not a marriage…
And justice is served, if God has a motive for good, a good purpose, which he can bring about, without fail.
Job 23:10 But he knows the way that I take; when he has tested me, I will come forth as gold.
How is that unjust? To refine a person, a fire is needed.
Then how can God make predictions, that involve human choices, if human free will is left fully intact?
Romans 9:27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved."
Romans 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob."
How can either of these predictions be certain, if people have full exercise of a free will?
Yes, but he won't do that now, according to the Open View. In the warfare worldview, events can cross God's will, frustrate his purpose, and thwart his best plans to save someone.
How is that being truly sovereign, at this moment?
Blessings,
Lee
In case some of you didn't know, Calvin wrote his TULIP theory only two years after he was saved. (someone may have already pointed this out - I didn't read every entry). Before his death, Calvin recanted his views.
Moral of the story - Don't write a theological book only two years after you are saved.
Moral of the story - Don't write a theological book only two years after you are saved.
Because it was just that, a posibility, not a predestined certainty.
Then you are not a Calvinist. Calvinism teaches that God predestined absolutely everything, including your motives.
The Bible depicts it using both analogies actually. I cannot love God if I do not control my own will.
Again, you sound like an Open Theist except for the "without fail" part. God tests us all the time but that does not require Him to overcome anyone's free will.
Same way you can only a lot better because He is not only smarter but has access to a lot more information.
Well they aren't certain; Jer. 18 says so. Although neither of these would be a difficult thing for God to predict based simply on His knowledge of the people involved, namely Israel. God knows us all better than we know ourselves and so can make very accurate prediction as to what we will do or won't do and the more people involved the easier such prediction become. It's a lot easier for me as a mere human to predict what a nation as a whole will do than it is for me to predict what any one individual will do. If that's true of me, it is certainly true of God.
His sovereignty is not based on what He does do but on what He has the authority and the ability to do. Soverignty is not about control, its about authority and having the power, will and ability to execute that authority at one's own discression. If God chooses to do something or not to do something and you don't like it and can't do anything about it, that means you are not soveriegn and He is. If, on the otherhand, you do something that God doesn't like and He can do something about it, even if He chooses not to do anything, He is still sovereign.
Resting in Him,
Clete
I do not think Calvin actually developed TULIP. There were later synods. Theodor Beza, his successor/pupil also had something to do with part of it.
Confirmation that Calvin did not develop TULIP explicitly:
http://www.biblehelp.org/tulip.htm
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
Plus TULIP'S foundation was already laid with the likes of Augustine, so it mattered little who finally came up with TULIP, it is a rather consistent view according to Augustinian (classical Greek) teachings about divine immutability.
But I agree, it would be interesting to hear why Calvin recanted from what was essentially to become Calvinism (as in TULIP). And if he truly did recant, I hope his coffin was well padded for the sake of how many time he would be "rolling over in the grave" as people (generally) attributed to him (even in through name only) a teaching that he understands is false.
But I agree, it would be interesting to hear why Calvin recanted from what was essentially to become Calvinism (as in TULIP). And if he truly did recant, I hope his coffin was well padded for the sake of how many time he would be "rolling over in the grave" as people (generally) attributed to him (even in through name only) a teaching that he understands is false.
Clete,
Here's the info you were wanting: (from my study bible)
The Church is like manure. Pile it up, and it stinks to high heaven. Spread it around, and it enriches the world. Sadly, many of God’s people believe the former. They are more interested in “piling themselves up” for the purpose of sanctification than obeying the command of CHRIST to save the world through evangelism (See footnote on II Cor 11:3). Because of this, certain doctrines concerning predestination have emerged. One such system of belief amongst Christians is Calvinism. The followers of John Calvin, a protestant reformer from France during the 1500’s, started Calvinism some sixty years after his death. Calvin began his search for God under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and by the age of twenty-one had mastered the Greek language as well as law. Then three and one half years later at the age of twenty-four he was presented the GOSPEL of CHRIST and was saved. Two years later he sat down and wrote one of the most influential works of the Protestant Reformation, called ‘Institutes of the Christian Religion.’ It was this work that fueled Calvinism. Though his first work (i.e., ‘Institutes of the Christian Religion.’) appeared to emphasize predestination (See footnote on Rom 8:29 & II Thess 2:13), his later commentaries proved he had had a change of mind. An example of this is seen in his comments on I John 2:2,
“Christ suffered for the sins of the WHOLE (emphasis added) world, and in the goodness of God is offered unto ALL (emphasis added) men without distinction, His blood being shed, not for a part of the world openly, but for the WHOLE (emphasis added) human race; for although in the world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet He holds out the propitiation to the WHOLE (emphasis added) world, since without exception He summons ALL (emphasis added) to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than the door unto hope.”
Here's the info you were wanting: (from my study bible)
The Church is like manure. Pile it up, and it stinks to high heaven. Spread it around, and it enriches the world. Sadly, many of God’s people believe the former. They are more interested in “piling themselves up” for the purpose of sanctification than obeying the command of CHRIST to save the world through evangelism (See footnote on II Cor 11:3). Because of this, certain doctrines concerning predestination have emerged. One such system of belief amongst Christians is Calvinism. The followers of John Calvin, a protestant reformer from France during the 1500’s, started Calvinism some sixty years after his death. Calvin began his search for God under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and by the age of twenty-one had mastered the Greek language as well as law. Then three and one half years later at the age of twenty-four he was presented the GOSPEL of CHRIST and was saved. Two years later he sat down and wrote one of the most influential works of the Protestant Reformation, called ‘Institutes of the Christian Religion.’ It was this work that fueled Calvinism. Though his first work (i.e., ‘Institutes of the Christian Religion.’) appeared to emphasize predestination (See footnote on Rom 8:29 & II Thess 2:13), his later commentaries proved he had had a change of mind. An example of this is seen in his comments on I John 2:2,
“Christ suffered for the sins of the WHOLE (emphasis added) world, and in the goodness of God is offered unto ALL (emphasis added) men without distinction, His blood being shed, not for a part of the world openly, but for the WHOLE (emphasis added) human race; for although in the world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet He holds out the propitiation to the WHOLE (emphasis added) world, since without exception He summons ALL (emphasis added) to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than the door unto hope.”
Rolf Ernst
New member
Reformed peopple don't believe in or study Calvin. We believe in Christ and study the Bible. No man's word has the power to destroy the truths in God's word.
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Clete,
Yes, but there's still responsibility, even for a possibility.
Yes, I am indeed not a full-fledged Calvinist, though the Calvinists I have read tend to waver a bit in this area, saying "allowed" when in the next paragraph they write "ordained," etc. And I don't think I've ever read any Calvinist saying explicitly that God ordains and decides all motives and even thoughts. That's where I drew back! There seems to be Scripture that says the opposite, even, Prov. 16:1.
But this was in reference to whether God was just in ordaining what happened to Job! I think this shows he was, this was for a good purpose. Now whether God can fail at this, and whether he overcomes free will is another question.
Then God is in complete control, where he makes predictions, and that's definite knowledge of the future, and predestination. And in the area of salvation! As in the verses about "only the remnant," and "all Israel," will be saved.
But Jer. 18 only says what will happen under general conditions, not what will happen in a specific situation, Jer. 18 does not tell us whether a given group of people will repent or not, Paul, however, does.
Is "I will make a new heavens and a new earth" also a guess? Or "There will be no more pain." What if people in heaven decide to sin? Couldn't free will ruin it all, and spoil even these … guesses?
But I'm wondering if we have solid footing here, not how easy or accurate such predictions might be…
Zechariah 13:9 This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, 'They are my people,' and they will say, 'The Lord is our God.'
Maybe not? Maybe this won't happen?
Yes, but you all are holding that God gave enough control up, for his will to be crossed, thwarted and frustrated. Being able to control it all does not make someone absolutely sovereign, any more than David was absolute king over Israel after Saul's death, with Ishbosheth ruling in Benjamin, he could have quite possibly taken the kingdom, but he didn't, and during that time, he was ruling Judah, but not the other tribes, he was not sovereign over them all...
Blessings,
Lee
Yes, but there's still responsibility, even for a possibility.
Yes, I am indeed not a full-fledged Calvinist, though the Calvinists I have read tend to waver a bit in this area, saying "allowed" when in the next paragraph they write "ordained," etc. And I don't think I've ever read any Calvinist saying explicitly that God ordains and decides all motives and even thoughts. That's where I drew back! There seems to be Scripture that says the opposite, even, Prov. 16:1.
But this was in reference to whether God was just in ordaining what happened to Job! I think this shows he was, this was for a good purpose. Now whether God can fail at this, and whether he overcomes free will is another question.
Then God is in complete control, where he makes predictions, and that's definite knowledge of the future, and predestination. And in the area of salvation! As in the verses about "only the remnant," and "all Israel," will be saved.
But Jer. 18 only says what will happen under general conditions, not what will happen in a specific situation, Jer. 18 does not tell us whether a given group of people will repent or not, Paul, however, does.
Is "I will make a new heavens and a new earth" also a guess? Or "There will be no more pain." What if people in heaven decide to sin? Couldn't free will ruin it all, and spoil even these … guesses?
But I'm wondering if we have solid footing here, not how easy or accurate such predictions might be…
Zechariah 13:9 This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, 'They are my people,' and they will say, 'The Lord is our God.'
Maybe not? Maybe this won't happen?
Yes, but you all are holding that God gave enough control up, for his will to be crossed, thwarted and frustrated. Being able to control it all does not make someone absolutely sovereign, any more than David was absolute king over Israel after Saul's death, with Ishbosheth ruling in Benjamin, he could have quite possibly taken the kingdom, but he didn't, and during that time, he was ruling Judah, but not the other tribes, he was not sovereign over them all...
Blessings,
Lee
Are you just dead set on blaming God for sin or what?
God took a risk that we would hate Him so that it might be possible for us to love Him. The two always go together, otherwise they are both meaningless. But He didn't just flippantly create us on a whim. He thought it out very carefully and made plans based on what He knew could, and perhaps probably would, happen.
God is not stupid and He doesn't play sucker bets. He knows what He is doing now and He knew what He was doing when He created us. I can promise you that things will end up better because He created us than they would have been had He not done so. God has not taken such a great risk that He could possibly end up as anything but the absolute victor in this battle between good and evil. If this were not so, He would not have done it.
The other four points of Calvinism are wrong for the same reasons. They are logically inconsistent and unbiblical.
There was never any question as to whether or not God was just. God is just, period. But if God overcomes one's free will then testing is meaningless. What would He be testing if your reaction was predestined by the one giving the test? It makes no sense.
What? Where did you get this out of what I said? It's not definite knowledge of the future and more than your prediction of tomorrow's whether is definite knowledge. The more information you have the more accurate your prediction about the weather might be but that doesn't mean you absolutely know for certain where and when it's going to rain.
Now, weather isn't the best thing to use as an example because it is one thing that God can indeed absolutly control if He decides He wants to but as long as you don't stretch it to its breaking point, the analogy works well. The point is that when people have a free will, there are things that are not knowable, even by God and thus there are things that simply cannot be predicted with absolute precision.
Jeremiah is talking about a very specific group of people, namely the nation of Israel. And God expect for Israel to repent several times and each time was met with disappointment and He reacted appropriately as Jer. 18 sets forward.
Which specific group of people are you referring to that Paul speaks of?
No! Of course not! God is not guessing anyway. You will not win this debate or convince me of anything by using loaded words like "guess".
You have to put some effort into staying on the same page with me here. God cannot know for an absolute certainty what I will do, but He certainly can know what He will do Himself.
Again, these are not guesses. Man that really burns my backside when you say that. You do understand that if I am right that you aren't simply making emotional points by casting the debate in such terms but that you are insulting the God you serve.
These aren't even predictions much less guesses. These are declarations made by God Himself. The order of things after this creation is ended cannot even be intelligently discussed. We simply do not have a slightest clue what we would be talking about. If God says that there will be no more pain then I cannot but believe Him. And I suspect that we will remain perfectly sinless in spite of our free will in the same manner that God Himself does. The point is we cannot know how; we'll simply have to wait until we get there to find out what God has in store for those who love Him.
So you are willing to sacrifice the ability to truly love on the alter of your desire for a feeling of solid footing? You know what? Trust God and let the chips fall where they may. Then you won't need solid footing; you won't even need feet. Whether this happens as predicted or not. The point being that if it doesn't happen, it will be because a just and righteous God changed His mind in accordance with changed circumstances that justly warranted such a change of mind. It doesn't make God a liar or a wavering sheet, blowing in the wind; it makes Him alive and reactive to the creation which He loves and has a real relationship with. God is a real person and He really is specifically interested in having a genuine personal relationship with you and me and anyone else who would like to have such a relationship. He really does desire to call us friend. This truth is magnified a hundred fold in the Open View. The genuine personhood of God and the reality of love is its primary presupposition.
Only to a certain point. God will not be ultimately defeated, that much we can know for certain. In fact, if His ultimate defeat was even a possibility then He would not be absolutely sovereign.
That's my line.
Control doesn't make you sovereign, authority makes you sovereign. The ability (power) to control, whether that ability is exercised or not, is certain part of what makes you sovereign, but control and sovereignty are not synonyms.
Resting in Him,
Clete
