3 Questions

[Patmos]

I
What is a bigger net than predestination?

Westminster Confessions ?

 

[Patmos]

Westminster Confessions
Chapter 3

Of God’s Eternal Decree


1. God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:a yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,b nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

Please will someone explain how ordaining everything offers no violence to free will ?

To me this is a contradiction from the start. What am I missing ?

 

[Patmos]

WCF Chapter 3 - Part 3.
By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.

Predestination gets an early mention!

How is foreordained to everlasting death not predestination ? What is the difference? Anyone.

 

[Patmos]

WCF Chapter 3 - Part 4.

These angels and men, thus predestinated, and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.

This leads to the conclusion that evangelism, intercessory prayer etc is pointless. It il not effect the unchangeable.

Part 4.
The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice.

As we are told, again, a few posts up by Nobdysfool, TOTAL DEPRAVITY/ TOTAL INABILITY is the lynch pin around which everything revolves. God foreordains the sin then says it is their sin; as if man could do anything about it! Does this sound like the Gospel ?

Rather:-
"The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let the one who hears say, "Come!" Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life."

 

[Patmos]

WCF Chapter 3 - Part 8.

The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care,..

What need to be said?

 

[Marvin Knox]

Please will someone explain how ordaining everything offers no violence to free will ?
To me this is a contradiction from the start. What am I missing ?

Apparently you are missing some of the most rudimentary truths in the scriptures.

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord.
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.
“For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return there without watering the earth and making it bear and sprout, and furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater; so will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; it will not return to Me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it." Isaiah 55:8-11

It was ordained from the first sending forth of God's Word that the Word of God would do exactly as He had been predestined to do.

Yet- He was not a robot. He was not a puppet. He made His choices freely and without coercion.

No one would say that the Word of God did not have free will. In fact our salvation depends on His personally overcoming sin.

Thank God He overcame.

It has been explained to you several times before how it is that God's predestination of all things done by the creature does not in any way illuminate the will of the creature. You have been given many examples of which this is only one.

You do not want to hear truth. You only want to argue against the sovereign, providentially controlling relationship of God to His creation.

Worship God as you choose.

As for me and my house - we will worship the God of the scriptures - not one of our own making.

 

[Patmos]

WCF Chapter 4
Of Creation

Part 2
After God had made all other creatures, he created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, endued with knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness, after his own image; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject unto change.

Calvinism supports by definition DOUBLE predestination: Calvin, Synod of DorT... R C Sprouls.
But here we see that Adam and Eve had liberty of their own will! - Another reason Calvinism is though inconsistent.

Part 4
The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in his providence, that it extendeth itself even to the first fall,

I am not understanding this. Is this saying by God's providence Adam and Eve fell ? If so what happened to Liberty of their own will?

 

[Patmos]

"It was ordained from the first sending forth of God's Word that the Word of God would do exactly as He had been predestined to do.

Yet- He was not a robot. He was not a puppet. He made His choices freely and without coercion. "


Was he predestined and could not do any other OR had free choice and could other than what he was coerced to do.

Perhaps a free choice between A) or A).

Marvellous

 

[Patmos]

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord.
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts."

I wish the 'Reformed fraternity' here on CF would take this to heart. Stop the rabbit trails, ducking and diving etc.

 

[Patmos]

....

It was ordained from the first sending forth of God's Word that the Word of God would do exactly as He had been predestined to do.

Yet- He was not a robot. He was not a puppet. He made His choices freely and without coercion.

No one would say that the Word of God did not have free will. In fact our salvation depends on His personally overcoming sin.

"His personally overcoming sin" A ? The whole debate is about MAN's free will leading to man's responsibility for his own sin. Maybe you are typing too fast.

It has been explained to you several times before how it is that God's predestination of all things done by the creature does not in any way illuminate the will of the creature. You have been given many examples of which this is only one.

Yet Calvin, Dort and WCF say the opposite. They say ALL things are predestined before the foundation of the world. Read it for yourself why don't you.

The debate is NOT about what the Bible says but about what Calvinist texts say throughout the last 500 years.

You do not want to hear truth. You only want to argue against the sovereign, providentially controlling relationship of God to His creation.

Actually - The TRUTH is what I DO want to hear. Authentic BIBLE truth. Nothing else.

Worship God as you choose.

I guess this is you idea of a pun.

As for me and my house - we will worship the God of the scriptures - not one of our own making.

Excellent. Join the club and give up all the man made stuff from the 16th century.

 

[Patmos]

Continued

WCF Chapter4 Part 6
As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God, as a righteous Judge, for former sins, doth blind and harden, from them he not only withholdeth his grace whereby they might have been enlightened in their understandings, and wrought upon in their hearts; but sometimes also withdraweth the gifts which they had, and exposeth them to such objects as their corruption makes occasions of sin; and, withal, gives them over to their own lusts, the temptations of the world, and the power of Satan, whereby it comes to pass that they harden themselves, even under those means which God useth for the softening of others.

I posted this as it raises a question about Once Saved Always Saved.

NOTE - I said 'question'. I am not making a statement or claiming anything.

Anyone want to contribute on this ? E.g examples on whom have been enlightened, one had the gift only for it to be taken away.

 

[Patmos]

WCF
Chapter 19
Of the Law of God

Part 1.
God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which he bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.

God gave Adan the law and endued him with the pose and ability to keep it, it says!
How then does this fit in with DOUBLE Predestination as expounded in e.g Canon of Dort or Author R C Sproul ?

I would certainly be interested to hear what a Calvinist who HAS READ the mentioned texts and UNDERSTANDS them to contribute.

I find Calvinism in all its forms confusing and inconsistent. In this and other threads I have seen responses such as:
"You do not want the truth"

"You are wasting your time"

"You only want to argue against the sovereign, providentially controlling relationship of God to His creation"

"You do not understand what you think you oppose"

"You run fast and loose"

To repeat once again, I have posted actual Calvinist text UNCHANGED. I have outlined where I don't get it and asked for clarification - what is wrong with that ?

 

[nobdysfool]

This is PRECISELY why I post Calvinist texts verbatim, without any change, as you saw in the Calvinism explained thread.


This is PRECISELY why I post Calvinist texts verbatim, without any change, as you saw in the Calvinism explained thread.


Actually, no, I have NOT played anything, fast or loose. Instead I take a LOT of time getting hold of ACTUAL Calvinist texts, and quote verbatim, without any change, as you saw in the Calvinism explained thread.

So far I have NOT been 'pinned down' at all, not once.

So far I have NOT been shown to be wrong at all, not once.

I was wondering if the 'Calvinist's' in the Calvinism explained thread had been raptured as there was no 'pinning down' or 'showing to be wrong'.

Is there a rapture for Amillennialist ?

Actually, I wasn't talking to you in the above quoted Conversation.

 

[nobdysfool]

Part of the problem, Patmos, is that you are trying to encompass ALL of your objections at once. Nobody is going to take that on. One thing at a time. When you keep piling more and ore on top of it, you are setting yourself up for frustration, as you clearly are frustrated now. Take a break.

 

[Patmos]

Actually, I wasn't talking to you in the above quoted Conversation.

Well pardon me cos I find that real hard to swallow.

You said:

... As it is, you play fast and loose with the terms to keep from being pinned down and shown to be wrong.
.

If it was not a response to me as the links erroneous show then who was it to ?

 

[Patmos]

Part of the problem, Patmos, is that you are trying to encompass ALL of your objections at once. Nobody is going to take that on. One thing at a time. When you keep piling more and ore on top of it, you are setting yourself up for frustration, as you clearly are frustrated now. Take a break.

"Part of the problem?" - Not so, there ain't no problem or part thereof.

Besides, Marvin feels inspired to go on the offensive, though missing the point, but hey.

Nope, not frustrated one bit. I have been laid up after a crippling injury and it is a joy to research this stuff.

As for break! NO, I hope to show next how the Canons of Dort was a kangaroo court, started by vendetta of hate and spilled over into a political storm involving several European countries in time of war. Agreeing to the canons was an act of appeasement in the struggle of UK and Holland against Spain.

As for WCF- WOWSER - really exciting. English civil war. Parliament against King Charles. UK Parliament need more foot soldiers so they cozy up with Scotland.WCF was part of that cozying up.
Nothing to do with Christ, everything to do with politics.

No wonder WCF has been amended and changed so many times in the USA.

 

[Patmos]

ALL of your objections at once.

Forgot to mention. They ain't my objections, although I fully see how they are objectionable. Which is why I do not support them. It seems a lot of professing Calvinists are in the same boat.

 

[Patmos]

In retrospect I do have a slight frustration - typing on an IPAD. Once I get my PC back I can really rock and roll.

Blessings

 

[nobdysfool]

Since you obviously think you know so-oo much more than the rest of us, I'm done responding to you Your attitude is not taking into account that no one else here has the time you demand to try and take all of this on. And you ARE trying to overwhelm things here which is a sure way to get to where nobody listens to you. Take. a. break.

 

[EmSw]

Since you obviously think you know so-oo much more than the rest of us, I'm done responding to you Your attitude is not taking into account that no one else here has the time you demand to try and take all of this on. And you ARE trying to overwhelm things here which is a sure way to get to where nobody listens to you. Take. a. break.

Are you leaving NF? That's the typical protocol I've seen here. Calvinists want you to ask them instead of 'assuming' what they believe. But when confronted to answer questions about their beliefs, most of them leave.