What's calvinism?
- Thread starter lost anomaly
- Start date
LightSon
New member
This is one of the things about Calvinism that I just don't get. In other words, we might as well be part of a fixed computer program running on the laptop of God's desk. Every thought I have, and every "choice" I make were determined by God. Hence we really are puppets.
I once asked a Calvinist friend of mine, "Would you say that my 'sin' is an act, ordained of God, for which He will hold me accountable"?
His response was, "yes".
If all my choices are predetermined, then they are not really mine, they are God's. I suppose He can, by His own sovereign right, hold me accountable, but really He is just passing judgment on His own divine fiat.
Originally posted by LightSon
This is one of the things about Calvinism that I just don't get. In other words, we might as well be part of a fixed computer program running on the laptop of God's desk. Every thought I have, and every "choice" I make were determined by God. Hence we really are puppets.
I once asked a Calvinist friend of mine, "Would you say that my 'sin' is an act, ordained of God, for which He will hold me accountable"?
His response was, "yes".
If all my choices are predetermined, then they are not really mine, they are God's. I suppose He can, by His own sovereign right, hold me accountable, but really He is just passing judgment on His own divine fiat.
Lightson,
POTD! :first:
Excellent thinking and an excellent post!
Since when do I have to ask a question?
You guys were playing "stump Clete" there for about a week then it just stopped.
How about a response to either of my last two major posts #330 or 332.
I was having to much fun to stop now.
The last time I had a discussion about Calvinism that went this long was with Hilston and I about went insane with frustration because we just couldn't get past what should have been really simply points. We've covered so much ground here that I can hardly believe it. I'm sure you guys can come up with something else you see wrong about the Open View. Don't be shy, let 'er rip. I'll take all comers!
Resting in Him,
Clete
lost anomaly
New member
This brings me to a very interesting question. If everything is predestined to the minutest of details, then would not God predestine your movtive to do something? Should this be the case, could someone's motive be the deciding factor whether or not someone is guilty or not?
John Reformed
New member
Originally posted by LightSon
This is one of the things about Calvinism that I just don't get. In other words, we might as well be part of a fixed computer program running on the laptop of God's desk. Every thought I have, and every "choice" I make were determined by God. Hence we really are puppets.
I once asked a Calvinist friend of mine, "Would you say that my 'sin' is an act, ordained of God, for which He will hold me accountable"?
His response was, "yes".
If all my choices are predetermined, then they are not really mine, they are God's. I suppose He can, by His own sovereign right, hold me accountable, but really He is just passing judgment on His own divine fiat.
I don't blame you for being confused. Your statement reflects a view that no sound calvinist would take seriously.
I don't expect that I will (in this life) ever be able to resolve God's soverignty and man's responsiblity. But I do know for certain that both are taught in Scripture. My duty to God is to read and believe what I have read. The comprehension of it is the work of the Holy Spirit.
Rom 9:19, 21 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?" But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
Phl 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of [his] good pleasure.
The above verses are not ripped from their context, nor are they the only ones which address this great doctrine. I fact, one could spend years reading the material that has been compiled.
I was not raised in a Reformed church. In fact, I did not come to believe that the calvinists had a good case until I was in my 50's. I had set out to prove them wrong, but was overcome by God's Word. Believe it or not.
If you are REALLY interested in knowing God better, I would recommend to you the following web site:
http://www.planetkc.com/puritan/index.html
God Bless,
John
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Lost_anomaly,
I think you have a good point (if I am understanding you here), that the motive may come from the person, and cause the guilt, even though the deed is predestined.
I'm not sure if God predestines motives! I think unbelievers do have a sinful human will, that gets involved in the acts that God's predestines, and thus makes them guilty. They do God's will, but with a bad intent, rather than a good intent:
GE 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good...
So I think I may agree here. Though I'm not sure, still thinking about this. Maybe other folks have other thoughts along these lines...
Blessings,
Lee
I think you have a good point (if I am understanding you here), that the motive may come from the person, and cause the guilt, even though the deed is predestined.
I'm not sure if God predestines motives! I think unbelievers do have a sinful human will, that gets involved in the acts that God's predestines, and thus makes them guilty. They do God's will, but with a bad intent, rather than a good intent:
GE 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good...
So I think I may agree here. Though I'm not sure, still thinking about this. Maybe other folks have other thoughts along these lines...
Blessings,
Lee
Lee,
There is no logical basis for believing that God predestines the acts themselves and not the motives also. In fact, the whole basis for the Augustinian belief that God predestined absolutely everything is based on the idea that God cannot change.
The logic goes like this.
- Things that are prefect do not change without becoming imperfect.
- God is perfect and cannot be less than perfect.
- Therefore, God cannot change.
- God learning of an event that He hadn't already known about would be a change.
- Therefore the future is locked in place.
Since motives are things that God can be aware of, then they would fall into this logical construct, and thus they must have been predestined along with everything else.
Now, just so as to make sure you don't get the wrong idea. The above logic is flawed because it based on several false premises. But I present the Calvinist argument to show that one cannot have their cake and eat it too. If God predestined the actions then He also predestined the motives for those actions. ‘Either Or’, is not an option.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
It's almost as consistent as gravity that if someone has to actually say out loud (or on this case, type) that certain quoted verses are not taken out of context, that they are in fact just that, taken out of context.
It is truly uncanny, I don't remember every seeing an exception to this general rule.
Rom. 9 is talking about God choosing the nation of Israel, not individuals, which I established in post 330.
Phl. 2 doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with predestination! Talk about removing a text from it context! To even say such a thing tells me that you know very little if anything about how our relationship with God actually works.
I recommend strongly that you read Principles of Spiritual Growth by Miles J. Stanford. It doesn't have a thing to do with Calvinism or predestination but I guarantee that you'll never again make a connection between Phl. 2 and predestination or even God's sovereignty again. Plus you'll learn (if you don't already know) how to gain victory over sin in your daily walk with our Lord. Very cool stuff! :thumb:
Nope I don't believe it. You were overcome by either your own interpretation of it or by someone else’s but the idea of fate is not a Biblical one. As I've also established (post 332), predestination is rooted in Aristotelian Greek philosophy and penetrated into the church through Augustine.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
Z Man
New member
Please, do not let this hold you back from accepting what is Scripturally taught as truth. It is simply a mystery. The bible teaches us both that God is absolutely sovereign and that He does predestine, and, yes, He also still holds us accountable.Originally posted by LightSon
This is one of the things about Calvinism that I just don't get. In other words, we might as well be part of a fixed computer program running on the laptop of God's desk. Every thought I have, and every "choice" I make were determined by God. Hence we really are puppets.
I once asked a Calvinist friend of mine, "Would you say that my 'sin' is an act, ordained of God, for which He will hold me accountable"?
His response was, "yes".
If all my choices are predetermined, then they are not really mine, they are God's. I suppose He can, by His own sovereign right, hold me accountable, but really He is just passing judgment on His own divine fiat.
Romans 9:18-20
Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?" But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?
The following is an excerpt from John Piper's "Desiring God Ministries" website:
Z Man
New member
Clete,
I'm going to be straight up honest with you. First of all, I got a new job, so I'm busy with that. Not to mention, I'm studying for exam finals for the end of this Spring semester. But these are just excuses.
The real reason I haven't really responded to your post, aside from not really having the time, is that there is no way I can make a valid argument with you if you continue to interpret Scripture the way you showed me through your representation of Romans 9. I am baffled and very disturbed at the way you interpret that certain passage. I don't have the time to go into details right now, and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't matter anyways, but you totally take that passage of Scripture far beyond what is clearly being stated. Paul makes a simple observation:
He mourns for his fellow Israelites. He wishes they were blessed as he was, through Christ. But they are the people of God. Were God's promises to the Israelites in vain? Of course not. Paul states that not all of Israel are of Israel. God's promises weren't made to the actual seed of Abraham; the physical decendants of him. But rather, they were made to the elect, the children of promise. That's why God chose Jacob (and his people) over Esau (and his people). Does that make God unfair, since He chose before they had done anything good or bad - since God chose unconditionally? Paul says of course not, then gives examples of how God choses according to His will, not man's, to bring about His purposes, giving Pharaoh and the people of Egypt as an example. Then the objection is made that if everything happens according to God's will, why does He still find fault? But Paul clearly puts that objection to rest by making it clear that we are mere mortals; clay in the hands of an Almighty Potter who will make whatever He wishes to make, and there is nothing we can say to stop Him.
This is exactly what Romans 9 says in a nutshell. The fact that you totally rip it out of context and believe that Paul is simply restating Jeremiah 18 is ludicris. Paul may have used some portion of Jeremiah 18 to help him make his case, but he was not re-writing Jeremiah 18 in his own words to the readers of Romans! His objection and point to Romans 9 was to make it clear that it is not by our will that God shows mercy or hardens people. He didn't chose the children of promise, or those who would be destroyed, based on their good or evil deeds. No, but instead, He chose based on His will and His will alone. You gotta understand that. And until you come up with a better way at interpreting Scripture, and stop hiding or trying to cover up what is really being said to make your claims valid, there is no way we can continue our debate.
The way you interpret Scripture is nothing more than a way of lying to yourself. You read only what you want to read. Instead of allowing Scripture to conform your paradigm, your paradigm contines to conform Scripture. In doing this, you will never realize the truth that I truly desire to show you, God willing...
God bless. :zman:
Last edited:
Z Man,
I sympathize with how busy you must be and so I won't press the issue any further. I appreciate your intellectual honesty and look forward to the next time my iron can be sharpened by yours.
I will just quickly respond to your last paragraph....
I submit to you that the reverse is true. In fact, it is this very teaching on Romans 9 (along with a few others) that convinced me of the error of Calvinism. I had been a Calvinist (a real hard core 5 pointer) since I was in third grade. It wasn't until I was shown a theological system that squared better, not only with simply logic, but with the plain reading of Scripture that I was willing to drop Calvinism in favor of Acts 9 Dispensationalism (Open Theism just came along with the package as a logical conclusion/extension of Dispensationalism).
I wish you well in your new job, I'm sure you'll excel above and beyond you piers, God bless!
Resting in Him,
Clete
I sympathize with how busy you must be and so I won't press the issue any further. I appreciate your intellectual honesty and look forward to the next time my iron can be sharpened by yours.
I will just quickly respond to your last paragraph....
I submit to you that the reverse is true. In fact, it is this very teaching on Romans 9 (along with a few others) that convinced me of the error of Calvinism. I had been a Calvinist (a real hard core 5 pointer) since I was in third grade. It wasn't until I was shown a theological system that squared better, not only with simply logic, but with the plain reading of Scripture that I was willing to drop Calvinism in favor of Acts 9 Dispensationalism (Open Theism just came along with the package as a logical conclusion/extension of Dispensationalism).
I wish you well in your new job, I'm sure you'll excel above and beyond you piers, God bless!
Resting in Him,
Clete
LightSon
New member
Clete, Zman, John Reformed, et al.,
Thanks to all of you for engaging, and thanks to Clete for the POD - I'm not sure I really deserve it.
This latest exchange between Clete and Z made me chuckle because it reminded me of another situation.
Someone on another board had written the following (as a correction or chide):
That pretty much sums it up. Any unguarded thoughts, before you all pick up swords and start sparring again? Be careful, as PureX may be watching. He loves to cite how that Christian absolutists can't seem to agree on doctrine.
Sorry if my tone is sarcastic; that is how I am feeling. I am a traditional Biblicist, which means I do not question God, nor His word. But I do reserve the right to question the models that folks construct around (above) scripture and then try to assert that their model "equals" scripture. (i.e. Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, etc.)
Blessings to all of you. I am praying about this and seeking wisdom.
Thanks to all of you for engaging, and thanks to Clete for the POD - I'm not sure I really deserve it.
This latest exchange between Clete and Z made me chuckle because it reminded me of another situation.
Someone on another board had written the following (as a correction or chide):
To which I wrote the following. I trust you will see yourselves reflected in the second (bolded) paragraph.
I am going through a personal struggle over this. Scripture says, there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism," yet we know of uncounted denominations and splits, just within Christendom. Why is that? Calvinism vs Armenianism. Faith vs. works. OSAS or not. Adult believers-only baptism vs paedo baptism. pre vs post trib, pre verse amillenialism. RApture vs no raptrue. Tongues vs no-tongues, healing/no-healings. Word-of-faith name-it claim it. RCC, LDS, JW's and on and on. And when you ask each one, what is their answer?
Well......“we” have a sound Biblical hermeneutic and “they” do not. They have preconceived ideas at best, and are a soul damning Satanic counterfeit at worst. The resounding pontification continues,,, "one must interpret scripture with scripture and that is what WE have done." "They" (them over there) have not done this, and so any clear thinking person will be able to dismiss "them" as the false teacher/cult that they are.
So what is a poor nascent scripture student, like me, supposed to do? Pray about it? I've been praying about it for years. Do I find Godly counsel? If so, where? You know as well as I do, that it all boils down to which counselor you pick, as to what kind of counsel he/she will give. Are all my dear LDS friends going to burn in hell because of a few doctrinal distinctions? My pastor would insist that they will. I struggle with this. The RCC too; they're a "soul damning cult." I wonder how one would explain certain protestant/RCC distinctions to a non-English speaking pagan. "Well, their Jesus is not valid because of this or that..."
Anybody feel free to jump in. I am getting weary defending my positions. Why should my positions be more apt to be correct, just because I grew up with them, and because I have duped myself into believing they are Biblical?
That pretty much sums it up. Any unguarded thoughts, before you all pick up swords and start sparring again? Be careful, as PureX may be watching. He loves to cite how that Christian absolutists can't seem to agree on doctrine.
Sorry if my tone is sarcastic; that is how I am feeling. I am a traditional Biblicist, which means I do not question God, nor His word. But I do reserve the right to question the models that folks construct around (above) scripture and then try to assert that their model "equals" scripture. (i.e. Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, etc.)
Blessings to all of you. I am praying about this and seeking wisdom.
Your ever so bold ever so true observation Lightson is only confirmation that SIN INDWELLS the believers and EVIL is present with all.
These "things" are the CAUSE and the BLAME for ALL blindness of ALL people, believer or unbeliever.
Woe to "that man by whom offences come."
These "things" are the CAUSE and the BLAME for ALL blindness of ALL people, believer or unbeliever.
Woe to "that man by whom offences come."
John Reformed
New member
Well Bro. Clete...I suggest that you ignore what I said, and check the verses by reading them yourself.
John Reformed
New member
Originally posted by LightSon
Sorry if my tone is sarcastic; that is how I am feeling. I am a traditional Biblicist, which means I do not question God, nor His word. But I do reserve the right to question the models that folks construct around (above) scripture and then try to assert that their model "equals" scripture. (i.e. Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, etc.)
Blessings to all of you. I am praying about this and seeking wisdom.
Dispite doctrinal differences, there is only one true church. The TRUE church is composed of all those (regardless of denominational afilliation) who are "in Christ". I don't care how pure a person's doctrine is, if He is not "in Christ" he is a mere professor.
In this world you WILL have tribulation, but rejoice! for Christ has overcome the world!
The inward trials, that we all must endure, are a major component of sanctification; They come to make us strong. They are a blessing and an evidence of our salvation.
Psa 34:19 Many [are] the afflictions of the righteous: but the LORD delivereth him out of them all.
May God give you the grace to wait upon Him.
John
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Clete,
I don't think it's illogical. If it's not Scriptural, that's different! But I don't see it as inherently contradictory.
I'm not saying that God doesn't know motives in advance, I'm just wondering if they are all caused by God.
GE 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good.
God is said to be the cause of the deed here, but the source of the human motive is not specified. But maybe this verse refers to motives, though:
PS 105:25 He turned their heart to hate his people...
But you can put a motive behind this, and ask why they hated them. I would like to examine this further, I can't think of more verses right now, though. It does address this question: "I once asked a Calvinist friend of mine, 'Would you say that my "sin" is an act, ordained of God, for which He will hold me accountable'?"
I have some encouragement! Paul didn't seem real worried about believers' doctrinal slips:
PHP 3:15 And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.
We'll all agree eventually!
I believe that God's children have real freedom, though unbelievers do not:
2CO 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
I think believers can make real choices, within God's will, that there is not only and always one choice that is exactly God's will in any given situation:
1CO 9:4 Don't we have the right to food and drink?
Blessings,
Lee
I don't think it's illogical. If it's not Scriptural, that's different! But I don't see it as inherently contradictory.
I'm not saying that God doesn't know motives in advance, I'm just wondering if they are all caused by God.
GE 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good.
God is said to be the cause of the deed here, but the source of the human motive is not specified. But maybe this verse refers to motives, though:
PS 105:25 He turned their heart to hate his people...
But you can put a motive behind this, and ask why they hated them. I would like to examine this further, I can't think of more verses right now, though. It does address this question: "I once asked a Calvinist friend of mine, 'Would you say that my "sin" is an act, ordained of God, for which He will hold me accountable'?"
I have some encouragement! Paul didn't seem real worried about believers' doctrinal slips:
PHP 3:15 And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.
We'll all agree eventually!
I believe that God's children have real freedom, though unbelievers do not:
2CO 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
I think believers can make real choices, within God's will, that there is not only and always one choice that is exactly God's will in any given situation:
1CO 9:4 Don't we have the right to food and drink?
Blessings,
Lee
You miss my point.
While I could make a very good argument as to why it is, in fact, illogical to assume that God would predestine the acts and not the motives, that was not what I was attempting to do.
My point was that the Calvinist belief that God predestines everything is based upon the belief that God is immutable. The logical progression from the immutability of God to the predestination of all things is inclusive of ALL future points of fact, including motives.
The Calvinist logic says that ALL facts that are knowable or that every will be knowable must be currently known by God or else the learning of those facts would be a change in the immutable God. Thus, there is no basis in logic for the idea that the acts of history are predestined and not the motives also because both, either are currently, or at some point would become, knowable facts.
Resting in Him,
Clete
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Clete,
That's what I am hoping you would do! I don't want to subscribe to a contradiction.
I agree! You are missing my point. I'm not saying that God doesn't know (future) motives. I'm just wondering if he can be said to be the primary cause of them.
Blessings,
Lee
That's what I am hoping you would do! I don't want to subscribe to a contradiction.
I agree! You are missing my point.
I'm not saying that God doesn't know (future) motives. I'm just wondering if he can be said to be the primary cause of them.Blessings,
Lee