Does Calvinism limit God?

[John Reformed]

Dear godrulz,

I appreciate the effort you have made to educate and inform me of where I have missed the boat regarding Rom 9-11. Nevertheless, in all that you wrote, you failed to provide a straightforward answer to the dilema posed by Rom 9:13 (regardless of whether or not it refers to nations or individuals). The verse says what it says.

Food for thought:

CHOSEN "Selected from a number, picked out, elect, choice" — Webster.

Matt. 20:15. "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?" "... for many be called but few chosen" (Matt. 22:14).

Mark 13:20. ". . . but for the elect's sake, whom he has chosen, he has shortened the days" (verses 22, 27).

John 15:16. "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you . . ." (verse 19).

Acts 9:15. "But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way. for he is a chosen vessel unto me . . ."

 

[godrulz]

God's choice can also be based on our response (or lack thereof) to His drawing and influence (not all things have to be God's unilateral predestined will, especially in the realm of moral and eternal choices). God initiates and gets the glory, while we are still responsible, accountable, and free (as He intends and desires for those in His personal and moral image).

The context of some of your verses are a chosing to an office (apostle/leader), not a calling to individual salvation (which precedes the call to ministry).

Not every verse in Rom. 9-11 is about the corporate election of Israel. This is the general context, but each verse must be interpreted on its own merit. Other applications and principles arise from this didactic and illustrative passage. Paul often makes a doctrinal case and then gives the practical applications for our lives.

There are some proof texts used by Calvinists and some by the alternate views. Sometimes we use the same texts, but interpret them differently. The challenge is to look at each verse and interpret and apply it with a sound hermeneutic. Some verses are not easily resolved (and hence the endless debate). i.e. every verse we throw out may have alternate ways to look at it (though there is only one intended interpretation). This is beyond the scope of our limited time and energy on a non-technical theology forum.

 

[geralduk]

The answer then is not to take a verse or two and use THEM to give us the understanding of scripture but to put them not only into the CONTEXT of the chapter they are in but also in the context of ALL scripture.
The 'endless debate' comes more from "carnal minds" RATHER than a lack of understanding. and an unwillingness to be LED by the HOLY SPIRIT and more by our own 'reasoning' and 'wisdom.

 

[helmet84]

The original title

The original title

Concerning the title of this thread:

Does Calvinism limit God?

Answer: No :nono:

helmet84

 

[godrulz]

Calvinism limites God by wrongly saying He must control every mundane and moral detail in the universe to be 'sovereign'. There are other moral agents with free will that can 'limit' God's will at times. e.g. Hitler killing millions of Jews.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by godrulz

There are other moral agents with free will that can 'limit' God's will at times. e.g. Hitler killing millions of Jews.

In other words, Hitler was more powerful than God?

:nono:

 

[John Reformed]

Originally posted by godrulz

Calvinism limites God by wrongly saying He must control every mundane and moral detail in the universe to be 'sovereign'. There are other moral agents with free will that can 'limit' God's will at times. e.g. Hitler killing millions of Jews.

Please my friend...refrain from putting false arguements in the mouths of calvinists. God MUST? Whos says God MUST? And even if some mis-guided soul did say something of that nature, how does it equate with limiting God?

God DOES rule over His creation, not by compulsion, but according to His good pleasure.

Read Acts 4: 27,28. I'd like to hear your explanation of these verses.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by Z Man

In other words, Hitler was more powerful than God?

:nono:

if i don't want my child to eat a cookie before dinner and i watch as they disobey me does that mean my child is more poweful than me?

 

[John Reformed]

Originally posted by godrulz

God's choice can also be based on our response (or lack thereof) to His drawing and influence (not all things have to be God's unilateral predestined will, especially in the realm of moral and eternal choices). God initiates and gets the glory, while we are still responsible, accountable, and free (as He intends and desires for those in His personal and moral image).

The context of some of your verses are a chosing to an office (apostle/leader), not a calling to individual salvation (which precedes the call to ministry).

Not every verse in Rom. 9-11 is about the corporate election of Israel. This is the general context, but each verse must be interpreted on its own merit. Other applications and principles arise from this didactic and illustrative passage. Paul often makes a doctrinal case and then gives the practical applications for our lives.

There are some proof texts used by Calvinists and some by the alternate views. Sometimes we use the same texts, but interpret them differently. The challenge is to look at each verse and interpret and apply it with a sound hermeneutic. Some verses are not easily resolved (and hence the endless debate). i.e. every verse we throw out may have alternate ways to look at it (though there is only one intended interpretation). This is beyond the scope of our limited time and energy on a non-technical theology forum.

Please...I am not a child! Open-Theism robs God of His omniscience. It also insists that God meet certain standards imposed upon Him by the wisdom of men. The problem lies in one's pre-suppositions.

Please show me in scripture where this marvelous freedom of the unregnerate man is to be found. Slave to sin; held captive by the devil to do his will, dead in sin, heart of stone, thinks the things of God are foolishness, not able to discern spiritual things...on and on and on.

Show me free will from Scripture!

John

 

[John Reformed]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

if i don't want my child to eat a cookie before dinner and i watch as they disobey me does that mean my child is more poweful than me?

Joseph was sold to the Egyptians by his brothers. The unlearned observer may have come to the conclusion that the brothers were acting against will. True? Of course those who know what the Bible says concerning God's attributes, would realize that God had his own purposes in the abduction of Joseph. What the brothers meant for evil, God meant for good. The same can be said of those who murdered Christ (Acts 4 ).

Why did you allow your child to eat the cookie? I'm not as familiar with your motives as I am with God's.

God Bless,
John

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

if i don't want my child to eat a cookie before dinner and i watch as they disobey me does that mean my child is more poweful than me?

That is a poor analogy. First of all, Hitler was not a child of God. Not everyone on this planet is a sheep. Secondly, if Hitler was a child of God, for argument's sake, and God did not will for him to kill millions of His people, yet Hitler did it anyway and limited God's will, then yes, Hitler is more powerful than God.

If you told your child to not kill his friends that came over to visit him, and he did it anyway, and you just sat there and watched, than that child is in control, not you. He possesses the power and authority, and his will is what is sovereign, not yours.

 

[helmet84]

Originally posted by Z Man

If you told your child to not kill his friends that came over to visit him, and he did it anyway, and you just sat there and watched, than that child is in control, not you.

I would qualify that analogy. If he sat there and watched and was unable to stop the kid, then indeed the kid is more powerful and in control.

But if he has the power to stop the kid, but allows him to do it anyway, then we must conclude that he had some purpose for allowing the act.

And this is the way it is with God. The fact that God is ALL powerful, and yet allows sin to even exist, demonstrates that He has a purpose for doing so.

-- helmet84

 

[godrulz]

Jesus came to oppose sin and evil. He did not affirm it as God's will. The 'blueprint' world view is flawed (everything is according to God's plan). Rebellion is not part of God's will or plan, but is a possibility if love, freedom, relationship are real and not illusory.

The 'warfare' worldview better deals with relevant revelation (God created everything very good; sin and evil entered due to moral agent's possibility of obeying or disobeying; God has a plan and purpose to redeem creation, but rebellion still happens until the end of the Age).

Hitler is not more powerful than God (obviously). He is a mere mortal that was ultimately judged. God did not revoke his freedom, nor did He allow Hitler to conquer the world. Justice is ultimately done. In God's wisdom and justice, He allowed Hitler to do what he did. He did not condone it and was grieved by it. He could have struck him dead, but did not. If God could not have done this, you may have a point. Your comment insults our intelligence and shows a lack of understanding of how God relates to His creation. Hyper-sovereignty (meticulous control vs providential control) goes beyond the revelation of Scripture.

When you drive a car or decide what to eat, etc. you demonstrate free will. You do not need a verse for the obvious (though Scripture is full of people who exercise their wills for or against God and His people).

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by godrulz

When you drive a car or decide what to eat, etc. you demonstrate free will. You do not need a verse for the obvious (though Scripture is full of people who exercise their wills for or against God and His people).

Proverbs 16:9
A man's heart plans his way, But the Lord directs his steps.

Driving your car, or picking out your favorite flavor ice cream, or doing whatever you please may seem like free will to you, but whatever we do is what the Lord intended to begin with. It was His plan that everything happen exactly how He purposed it.

You wanna know why many things do not happen the way we intend them too, or had wish them too? Because it wasn't the will of God. There are no such things as "accidents".

BTW, what's up with this:

Jesus came to oppose sin and evil. He did not affirm it as God's will.

Nobody said He did. You're building strawmen here. You have a bad habit of doing that. Also you stated:

God did not revoke his freedom, nor did He allow Hitler to conquer the world.

Ummm.... if God did not revoke Hitler's freedom, then why did He stop him from taking over the world? This statement of yours is contridictory.

Godrulz,
Just curious, but how do you pray for lost loved ones and other non-believers?

 

[helmet84]

Originally posted by godrulz
Jesus came to oppose sin and evil.

Amen.

Originally posted by godrulz
He did not affirm it as God's will.

If by this you mean that God did not approve of it, I agree. But it had to be God's 'will' since He permitted it. Otherwise, God is not ALL powerful.

Originally posted by godrulz
Rebellion is not part of God's will or plan,

Same answer here. God often decrees (or allows) what He does not approve of.

Originally posted by godrulz
love, freedom, relationship are real and not illusory.

Absolutely real and not illusory. How powerful God is!

Originally posted by godrulz (God created everything very good; sin and evil entered due to moral agent's possibility of obeying or disobeying; God has a plan and purpose to redeem creation, but rebellion still happens until the end of the Age).

Most calvinists would not disagree with this statement.

Originally posted by godrulz
In God's wisdom and justice, He allowed Hitler to do what he did.

Whoa! Now there you go! God allowed Hitler to do what he did! Exactly right. We just say that He decreed from eternity to allow it. And if God allows something, that means He has a purpose. God does nothing arbitrarily.

Originally posted by godrulz
He did not condone it and was grieved by it.

Amen.

Originally posted by godrulz
He could have struck him dead, but did not.

Yes, God is ALL powerful, and the fact that He didn't strike him dead proves that it was His will for it to happen.

-- helmet84

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by Z Man

That is a poor analogy. First of all, Hitler was not a child of God. Not everyone on this planet is a sheep. Secondly, if Hitler was a child of God, for argument's sake, and God did not will for him to kill millions of His people, yet Hitler did it anyway and limited God's will, then yes, Hitler is more powerful than God.

If you told your child to not kill his friends that came over to visit him, and he did it anyway, and you just sat there and watched, than that child is in control, not you. He possesses the power and authority, and his will is what is sovereign, not yours.

i wasn't trying to portray that hitler was a child of God.

helmet84 made a good point that i like about the difference between being able to and choosing not to compared to being unable to.

like in the example, i had the power to stop my child from disobeying me and yet i chose not to. i was still "sovereign" in this situation was i not? i didn't lose any power by deciding not to intervene did i? surely not.

 

[John Reformed]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

i wasn't trying to portray that hitler was a child of God.

helmet84 made a good point that i like about the difference between being able to and choosing not to compared to being unable to.

like in the example, i had the power to stop my child from disobeying me and yet i chose not to. i was still "sovereign" in this situation was i not? i didn't lose any power by deciding not to intervene did i? surely not.

There is a limit to all analogies, especially when we attempt to compare the infinte power God Almighty with mere men.

The following is an article which may be of some help to us.

Knowability of God
Throughout history certain returning questions have been answered in different theological and philosophical terms. Perhaps the most debated question has been whether God is to be known by reason, by faith, or by experience. Each solution has had powerful and persuasive adherents. Those who argue that God can be known by reason offer one version or another of the classical proofs of God's existence: the cosmological proof from the existence of the world; the teleological proof from the order of the finite world; the ontological proof from the implications of the very concept of God as a perfect and necessary being; and the moral proof from the implications of moral experience. They argue that any theology intellectually respectable enough to speak to modern, intelligent men and women must be grounded in rational philosophy.

Those who believe God can be known only by faith tend to be skeptical of such philosophical proofs and possess a perhaps more transcendent image of God. For them, the God of rational theology, proved and tailored by thinking processes, is merely the creature of humanity's own wayward wisdom. God himself must speak to humankind if he is to be known rightly, or even at all, and therefore faith, as a response to divine Revelation, is the only path to a true knowledge of God.

(http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/god.htm)

John

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

i wasn't trying to portray that hitler was a child of God.

helmet84 made a good point that i like about the difference between being able to and choosing not to compared to being unable to.

like in the example, i had the power to stop my child from disobeying me and yet i chose not to. i was still "sovereign" in this situation was i not? i didn't lose any power by deciding not to intervene did i? surely not.

Of course, but your analogy was defending godrulz's position that Hilter limited God's will. I replied to godrulz's statement by saying that that means Hitler is more powerful than God if he was able to do something God did not intend. Then you gave an analogy about how you tell your child not to get a cookie and they do it anyways, which was a poor analogy. You were basically stating that even though, like godrulz had previously stated, Hitler had "thwarted" the will of God and done something God did not want to happen, God was still in control and sovereign.

But that is false. If God did not want Hitler to kill millions of Jews, the holocaust would of never happened. If you do not want your child to murder his best friend, and yet you sit there and watch him do it, after you deliberatly told him that he better not, then that child's will is in control of things, not yours. Same way in this situation. If God did not want or intend for Hitler to kill all those Jews, yet Hitler did it anyways and thwarted the will of God, then Hitler's will is/was more powerful than God's, and ultimately, Hitler was in charge, not God.

Everything happens according to God's purpose and plans. His will is in control, not mine, not yours, and not Hitler's. Remember the words that Christ told Pilate during His trial:

John 19:10
Then Pilate said to Him, "Are You not speaking to me? Do You not know that I have power to crucify You, and power to release You?" Jesus answered, "You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above."

And also the passage of scripture which God explains His reasons for Pharaoh's existence:

Exodus 9:16
But indeed for this purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.

Therefore, a person may think they have free will or ultimate power, and that they are doing according to what they purpose, and to a degree, they are. But whatever we do is what God had orginally purposed to begin with.

Proverbs 16:9
A man's heart plans his way, But the Lord directs his steps.

There are no such things as "accidents".

 

[godrulz]

Heresy is half truth, not all falsehood.



If there are specific details in history that God lets run their course without intervention (to preserve genuine freedom, responsibility, accountability), this does not mean that God has abdicated total control of the universe. He is not a Deist god who sits aloof and never intervenes once He winds the universe up. He is not also the all-controlling God of Calvinism who never has His will thwarted. It is not necessary to conclude that there are no accidents, because God does not change the laws of nature at a whim. Some things, not all things are controlled. If someone gets drunk and drives off a cliff, it is not necessary to make God culpable for this, nor say it really was His will because He did not intervene. The logical conclusion is that God is ultimately responsible for evil, since He allows it or does not stop it at all times. He could, but He does not intervene all the time. The problem is not with God, His ability, His sovereignty, etc. It is simply the type of creation that God sovereignly chose to make where genuine moral freedom exists and the inherent possibility of accidents, good, evil are genuine, and not illusions.

The verses about Jesus and Pharaoh are specific to those situations, and should not be argued as generalizations for every situation or choice in history (logical fallacy...goes beyond what other passages would teach).

The Lord directing our steps does not have to mean every minute detail or every choice. He is responsive, creative, and omnicompetent and able to bring His purposes to pass despite an array of subordinate choices that may even hinder His plan at the moment.

 

[John Reformed]

Wheres the beef?

Wheres the beef?

Dear godrules,

Why should anyone believe your theory? You claim that the verses,which Z-Man cited, are specific to each situation, but ...what is your evidence?

John