Verses that Prove Calvinism to be a false Dogma

[Marvin Knox]

"We have free will. We are free to choose something other than what God's expressed will is. Hence this pesky sin situation we find ourselves involved with."

I am confused here. Some of Calvinist say "We have free will" yet other Calvinists deny it outright.

Which is it that you people believe ?

"We people" are a somewhat diverse group in our view on thing theological just is any broad labeled category of theologians is . Take a look at Arminians and other non-Calvinists as a group (even Orthodox and Catholics) if you want to see diversity of belief.

For the record - I'm not a 5 point Calvinist as I have shown many times here. In fact I would have to "caveat" every single point of the acronym "TULIP" if I were to expound the doctrines of grace.

You have made the assumption that I am a "Calvinist". I suppose I can live with that since my view of the will of fallen mankind is more in line with what Calvin taught than that of current so called 5-point Calvinists.

When people debate "free will", they have to make sure what each person means by the term.

But I'm not up to rewriting the many works that have been written about the "bondage of the will" and such. You'll have to go elsewhere for that.

I am using it here in the generic sense. That is to say that fallen men can and do make meaningful choices of their own volition. The same is true for regenerated men.

You also write "We are free to choose something other than Goid's expressed will". So you deny predestination!

The sovereign, secret, and decreed will of God is not same as His expressed will.

Considerations of predestination belong to the former.

We don't know what was predestined by God until it comes to past. The secret things belong to God. What is revealed belongs to us. Once something comes to past - we can say with certainty that it was predestined to take place (in the sovereign decreed, and predestined, plan of God).

This is one reason that Calvinists have been among the most evangelical minded Christians in history. They don't presume to know who or what God has in store as far as any event - such as the eventual salvation of any particular person. They just know that they are to preach the gospel and God will give the increase as He has sees fit.

 

[nobdysfool]

"What, do you believe that Calvinists must all march in lock-step and say the exact same thing?"

Consitency would be good.

That is demanding something that even non-Calvinists cannot do. It's disingenuous to make such a request.

However. The age old problem is if everything is predestined then how can mere mortals be held to account for something they could not have avoided, worse something that God predestined them to do in the first place.

Men are responsible for their actions. God does not force anyone against their will to do anything. He knows what they will do, and the doing of it is the basis of their responsibility. In virtually every case, there was a choice, and God holds them responsible for the choices they make, even as He knows what those choices will be. His knowledge of those choices does not transfer responsibility for them to Him.

 

[Patmos]

"We people" are a somewhat diverse group in our view on thing theological just is any broad labeled category of theologians is . Take a look at Arminians and other non-Calvinists as a group (even Orthodox and Catholics) if you want to see diversity of belief.

For the record - I'm not a 5 point Calvinist as I have shown many times here. In fact I would have to "caveat" every single point of the acronym "TULIP" if I were to expound the doctrines of grace.

You have made the assumption that I am a "Calvinist". I suppose I can live with that since my view of the will of fallen mankind is more in line with what Calvin taught than that of current so called 5-point Calvinists.

When people debate "free will", they have to make sure what each person means by the term.

But I'm not up to rewriting the many works that have been written about the "bondage of the will" and such. You'll have to go elsewhere for that.

I am using it here in the generic sense. That is to say that fallen men can and do make meaningful choices of their own volition. The same is true for regenerated men.

The sovereign, secret, and decreed will of God is not same as His expressed will.

Considerations of predestination belong to the former.

We don't know what was predestined by God until it comes to past. The secret things belong to God. What is revealed belongs to us. Once something comes to past - we can say with certainty that it was predestined to take place (in the sovereign decreed, and predestined, plan of God).

This is one reason that Calvinists have been among the most evangelical minded Christians in history. They don't presume to know who or what God has in store as far as any event - such as the eventual salvation of any particular person. They just know that they are to preach the gospel and God will give the increase as He has sees fit.

I beg your pardon as I did make a wrong assumption.
I am with you regarding meaningful choices and volition. In a previous post you mentioned several type of God's will - Decretive, permissive etc. I was glad to read that and maybe that should have alerted me you were not a 5 pointer.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Sounds like 'The Matrix'

It is a little like the matrix isn't it?

Secret scrolls are opened in Heaven and bowls poured out on the earth and events on earth correspond to those activities that take place in Heaven.

Battles between armies take place on earth and there are secret armies in every mountain.

We cast out demons here on earth and Satan is cast out of Heaven correspondingly.

We work out our salvation as He works out what He desires to take place in us at the same time.

We make a free will choice to accept Christ as our personal savior and God fulfills His electing grace in us.

Caiaphas curses Israel and God utters a prophecy out of the same evil mouth at the very same instant.

Joseph's brothers sell him to Egypt as an evil act as the Lord sends him to Egypt at the same time for an all together good purpose.

God issues only good and perfect decrees and then carries those decrees out through the evil acts of men and angels.

Evil men crucify the Lord of Glory and will answer for their evil sins - even as the Creator of the universe brings to past His good and perfect plan for the ages through their evil actions.

If you're a Holy Spirit educated and thinking Christian - you may occasionally hear the music from the twilight zone in the background. I know I do.

Of course some people tune the music out by simply picking and choosing what scriptures to incorporate into their theology.

But that's not the way the Holy Spirit and I roll.

 

[Patmos]

"... picking and choosing...But that's not the way the Holy Spirit and I roll"

Me neither.

 

[Patmos]

That is demanding something that even non-Calvinists cannot do. It's disingenuous to make such a request.



Men are responsible for their actions. God does not force anyone against their will to do anything. He knows what they will do, and the doing of it is the basis of their responsibility. In virtually every case, there was a choice, and God holds them responsible for the choices they make, even as He knows what those choices will be. His knowledge of those choices does not transfer responsibility for them to Him.

I have demanded nothing.

Men are responsible for their actions . Yes, and right here is the age old problem. E.g Tulipbee in another thread quotes Calvin and his Institutes stating the opposite. Man is not responsible but God predestined it all in the first place.

Mans responsibility for his self chosen actions ( as you state above) is polar opposite to standard Calvinism, as TulipBee has posted recently, I.e that God predestined man so he could choose nothing.

 

[Marvin Knox]

I have demanded nothing.

Men are responsible for their actions . Yes, and right here is the age old problem. E.g Tulipbee in another thread quotes Calvin and his Institutes stating the opposite. Man is not responsible but God predestined it all in the first place.

Mans responsibility for his self chosen actions ( as you state above) is polar opposite to standard Calvinism, as TulipBee has posted recently, I.e that God predestined man so he could choose nothing.

You need to consider the source when considering what TulipBee says. He has misquoted and misrepresented Calvinistism numerous times.

No Calvinist (and certainly not John Calvin) believes or teaches that man is not responsible for his actions and choices -quite the opposite.

That man is responsible for his self chosen actions is not the polar opposite of Calvinism. It is the rock solid basis for the doctrines of grace that Calvinists teach.

 

[Patmos]

You need to consider the source when considering what TulipBee says. He has misquoted and misrepresented Calvinist numerous times.

No Calvinist (and certainly not John Calvin) believes or teaches that man is not responsible for his actions and choices -quite the opposite.

That man is responsible for his self chosen actions is not the polar opposite of Calvinism. It is the rock solid basis for the doctrines of grace that Calvinists teach.

It was reading Tulipbee that prompted me to post. Very offensive and inaccurate allegations of which I felt compelled to respond to.

I think you are wrong in saying no Calvinist believes that man is not responsible for his sins. TulipBee does for one. I could find some famous theologians and quote them here. Looking at several threads it is as else where, this is the big issue and has been since Augustine.

 

[Patmos]

"All things whatever arise from, and depend on, the divine appointment; whereby it was foreordained who should receive the word of life, and who should disbelieve it; who should be delivered from their sins, and who should be hardened in them; and who should be justified and who should be condemned." - Martin Luther

Sure, Luther was not a Calvinist but the doctrine is exactly the same.

 

[Patmos]

No Calvinist (and certainly not John Calvin) believes or teaches that man is not responsible for his actions and choices -quite the opposite.

That man is responsible for his self chosen actions is not the polar opposite of Calvinism. It is the rock solid basis for the doctrines of grace that Calvinists teach.

Nope, quote from monergism.com

"Nearly all Modern Lutheran scholars insist that while John Calvin and his followers (Beza, Bucer, Knox, etc.) affirm the doctrine of double predestination, Martin Luther and his followers affirm the doctrine of single predestination."


Double predestination affirms that in eternity past, prior to the creation of the universe, God chose and elected a people for himself whom he would actively save in the outworking of history, but at the same time, chose to pass over the remaining number of mankind, thus handing them over to their sinful state, and reprobating them to the consequences of their sin: eternal hell. Double predestination affirms both God's election and His reprobation of certain men in eternity past. That is, God decreed that some would be saved, and others would be lost. Calvinist theologian Louis Berkhof defines reprobation as "[T]hat eternal decree of God whereby He has determined to pass some men by with the operations of His special grace, and to punish them for their sins, to the manifestation of His justice."

 

[Marvin Knox]

"All things whatever arise from, and depend on, the divine appointment; whereby it was foreordained who should receive the word of life, and who should disbelieve it; who should be delivered from their sins, and who should be hardened in them; and who should be justified and who should be condemned." - Martin Luther
Sure, Luther was not a Calvinist but the doctrine is exactly the same.

None of this quote (or the material in your next post) deny that men are responsible for their own choices.

It may be your take on it that they should not be. But it's not what Calvinists believe - quite the opposite in fact is true.

Obviously I can't speak for everyone who puts "Calvinist" in their identification when posting anonymously on the internet - "Tulipbee" or anyone else. Frankly I'm not sure "Tulipbee" is all there

Predestination and freewill ARE in conflict.

I think otherwise. Nor is there any logical reason why you would think that they are IMO.

God’s predestination of all things that happen in God’s creation and the free will of His creatures are not in conflict. In fact – they complement each other quite nicely as I see it.

I would love to know what 'means' are.

"Means" is the way that God usually brings to past the things that He had decreed to take place.

They are usually things that are completely within the nature of His creation as it normally functions. Miracles would be the exception.

God may well have predestined a draught for Egypt. But that doesn’t mean that He necessarily sent fire from Heaven specifically to warm the Middle East up a bit. He likely did it by simply “allowing” natural weather patterns to take their course at that time in history.

I put “allowing” in parenthesis because God’s simply standing by and watching things happen in His creation is not the Biblical picture of His omnipresent and providential controlling relationship with His creation – even if that is the picture painted for us by many non-Reformed teachers here and elsewhere.

God predestined this particular elect man named Marvin to believe the scriptures and accept the Lord as his savior. But that doesn’t mean that He simply zapped me into the Kingdom of God in a single instant.

I wrestled with the truth of scripture for many years before I gave in to the Holy Spirit. It was hard for me to kick against the goads. But I did it anyway for quite a few years anyway.

I, and my fellow creatures that taught me and eventually persuaded me to become a believer, all functioned in the way that men usually do. The ones who preached the gospel to me quite likely struggled with the temptation not to bother with an argumentative guy like me. I, on the other hand, struggled for a long time with the truth of the gospel and my natural tendency to be prideful and not give in to it’s demands.

The personal decisions we made along the way ended in my receiving Christ – just as God had ordained to take place. My decision was my decision – a “free will” choice that I made. That was the means that God used to bring me to glory.

But it was really God who was at work in me and the people who witnessed to me that brought me to glory.

These are examples of the natural “means” that God uses to bring His purposes to past.

P.S.
I've got issues with this website.

I'm taking too much time to get posts out or changed.

I've got other things to do for the rest of the day so I'm off for now.

I'll likely check in tonight. If the problem continues - I may just give up entirely.

 

[nobdysfool]

I have demanded nothing.

It seemed like you were. My apologies for misunderstanding what you were asking.

Men are responsible for their actions . Yes, and right here is the age old problem. E.g Tulipbee in another thread quotes Calvin and his Institutes stating the opposite. Man is not responsible but God predestined it all in the first place.

Mans responsibility for his self chosen actions ( as you state above) is polar opposite to standard Calvinism, as TulipBee has posted recently, I.e that God predestined man so he could choose nothing.

For one thing, if you took a look at my profile and avatar, you would not find me claiming to be a Calvinist. While there are points of Calvinism i agree with (or at least don't have an issue with), there are places where I diverge from a hard-line Calvinist position. The reason I seem to support their theology has to do more with the gross misrepresentation of that theology that i see so many tossing out here, as though it were true, when anyone with a good understanding of Calvinism would see right away that what is being claimed as Calvinist theology is a bogus as a $3 bill, and the fact that i have studied the Scriptures for years, and have drawn my own conclusions, which I believe are from the Holy Spirit, as it is He who will lead us into all truth.

It irritates me when some people throw out observations and claims about Calvinism that are so clearly false, and I can guess that they are getting this junk from anti-Calvinist websites and writings, and exercising zero discernment about it, because those sources are telling them what they want to hear. They don't seem to realize that what they're doing is the equivalent of talking to a Cadillac dealer about the features and benefits of buying a Lincoln. They are not getting unbiased info, and Truth cannot be obtained from faulty, biased sources.

My advice to you is to quit worrying so much about what others are saying, and study to show yourself approved, rightly dividing the Word of Truth, and realize it is a process, not an event. We all have blind spots in our theology, myself included. We're all learning, or should be. I try not to speak about things that i am not settled on, which is why I very rarely, if ever, speak on matters of Eschatology. Marvin and I have had some good discussions, and I find that our views have a lot of similarities. Not 100%, but I don't think he expects that of me, and I don't of him. We are responsible for what we say and post, not for what others say and post.

 

[Patmos]

None of this quote (or the material in your next post) deny that men are responsible for their own choices.

It may be your take on it that they should not be. But it's not what Calvinists believe - quite the opposite in fact is true.

Obviously I can't speak for everyone who puts "Calvinist" in their identification when posting anonymously on the internet - "Tulipbee" or anyone else. Frankly I'm not sure "Tulipbee" is all there

I think otherwise. Nor is there any logical reason why you would think that they are IMO.

God’s predestination of all things that happen in God’s creation and the free will of His creatures are not in conflict. In fact – they complement each other quite nicely as I see it.

"Means" is the way that God usually brings to past the things that He had decreed to take place.

They are usually things that are completely within the nature of His creation as it normally functions. Miracles would be the exception.

God may well have predestined a draught for Egypt. But that doesn’t mean that He necessarily sent fire from Heaven specifically to warm the Middle East up a bit. He likely did it by simply “allowing” natural weather patterns to take their course at that time in history.

I put “allowing” in parenthesis because God’s simply standing by and watching things happen in His creation is not the Biblical picture of His omnipresent and providential controlling relationship with His creation – even if that is the picture painted for us by many non-Reformed teachers here and elsewhere.

God predestined this particular elect man named Marvin to believe the scriptures and accept the Lord as his savior. But that doesn’t mean that He simply zapped me into the Kingdom of God in a single instant.

I wrestled with the truth of scripture for many years before I gave in to the Holy Spirit. It was hard for me to kick against the goads. But I did it anyway for quite a few years anyway.

I, and my fellow creatures that taught me and eventually persuaded me to become a believer, all functioned in the way that men usually do. The ones who preached the gospel to me quite likely struggled with the temptation not to bother with an argumentative guy like me. I, on the other hand, struggled for a long time with the truth of the gospel and my natural tendency to be prideful and not give in to it’s demands.

The personal decisions we made along the way ended in my receiving Christ – just as God had ordained to take place. My decision was my decision – a “free will” choice that I made. That was the means that God used to bring me to glory.

But it was really God who was at work in me and the people who witnessed to me that brought me to glory.

These are examples of the natural “means” that God uses to bring His purposes to past.

P.S.
I've got issues with this website.

I'm taking too much time to get posts out or changed.

I've got other things to do for the rest of the day so I'm off for now.

I'll likely check in tonight. If the problem continues - I may just give up entirely.

Fair enough.

I started posting here in objection to TulipBee and I must not fall into the trap of thinking others agree with him (her) even if they are biased in some Reformed way.

For me God's Sovereignty and man's responsibility for his own actions is an unfathomable mystery. Many Calvinists say things that for many sound like puppet theory ( I am not saying you have). I could post many famous Calvinists as proof, R C Sproul would be good to quote. This causes a lot of consternation and no end of 'debate' and disagreement over centuries. I think that the foundation of Calvinism is in error, which does NOT mean that non Calvinists have got it right. 500 years ago the religious elite assert the world was flat and cast those who disagreed as heretics

"We people" are a somewhat diverse group in our view on thing theological just is any broad labeled category of theologians is . Take a look at Arminians and other non-Calvinists as a group (even Orthodox and Catholics) if you want to see diversity of belief.

For the record - I'm not a 5 point Calvinist as I have shown many times here. In fact I would have to "caveat" every single point of the acronym "TULIP" if I were to expound the doctrines of grace.

You have made the assumption that I am a "Calvinist". I suppose I can live with that since my view of the will of fallen mankind is more in line with what Calvin taught than that of current so called 5-point Calvinists.

When people debate "free will", they have to make sure what each person means by the term.

But I'm not up to rewriting the many works that have been written about the "bondage of the will" and such. You'll have to go elsewhere for that.

I am using it here in the generic sense. That is to say that fallen men can and do make meaningful choices of their own volition. The same is true for regenerated men.

The sovereign, secret, and decreed will of God is not same as His expressed will.

Considerations of predestination belong to the former.

We don't know what was predestined by God until it comes to past. The secret things belong to God. What is revealed belongs to us. Once something comes to past - we can say with certainty that it was predestined to take place (in the sovereign decreed, and predestined, plan of God).

This is one reason that Calvinists have been among the most evangelical minded Christians in history. They don't presume to know who or what God has in store as far as any event - such as the eventual salvation of any particular person. They just know that they are to preach the gospel and God will give the increase as He has sees fit.

I started posting here in objection to TulipBee and I must not fall into the trap of thinking others agree with him (her) even if they are biased in some Reformed way.

For me God's Sovereignty and man's responsibility for his own actions is an unfathomable mystery. Many Calvinists say things that for many sound like puppet theory ( I am not saying you have). I could post many famous Calvinists as proof, R C Sproul would be good to quote. This causes a lot of consternation and no end of 'debate' and disagreement over centuries. I think that the foundation of Calvinism is in error, which does NOT mean that non Calvinists have got it right. 500 years ago the religious elite assert the world was flat and cast those who disagreed as heretics. Obviously these elite were wrong as we know know. I think eventually the same will happen with several doctrines regarding reprobation.

Nobdysfool made a good point a few posts back. He said (not quoting direct) we should not be against each other but fighting satan. Absolutely right; though I do not think it will happen until the not so extreme of Calvinism and Arminianism come to some kind of understanding. A problem made worse by many who talk e.g like Tulipbee.

 

[Patmos]

None of this quote (or the material in your next post) deny that men are responsible for their own choices.

It may be your take on it that they should not be. But it's not what Calvinists believe - quite the opposite in fact is true.

Obviously I can't speak for everyone who puts "Calvinist" in their identification when posting anonymously on the internet - "Tulipbee" or anyone else. Frankly I'm not sure "Tulipbee" is all there

I think otherwise. Nor is there any logical reason why you would think that they are IMO.

God’s predestination of all things that happen in God’s creation and the free will of His creatures are not in conflict. In fact – they complement each other quite nicely as I see it.

"Means" is the way that God usually brings to past the things that He had decreed to take place.

They are usually things that are completely within the nature of His creation as it normally functions. Miracles would be the exception.

God may well have predestined a draught for Egypt. But that doesn’t mean that He necessarily sent fire from Heaven specifically to warm the Middle East up a bit. He likely did it by simply “allowing” natural weather patterns to take their course at that time in history.

I put “allowing” in parenthesis because God’s simply standing by and watching things happen in His creation is not the Biblical picture of His omnipresent and providential controlling relationship with His creation – even if that is the picture painted for us by many non-Reformed teachers here and elsewhere.

God predestined this particular elect man named Marvin to believe the scriptures and accept the Lord as his savior. But that doesn’t mean that He simply zapped me into the Kingdom of God in a single instant.

I wrestled with the truth of scripture for many years before I gave in to the Holy Spirit. It was hard for me to kick against the goads. But I did it anyway for quite a few years anyway.

I, and my fellow creatures that taught me and eventually persuaded me to become a believer, all functioned in the way that men usually do. The ones who preached the gospel to me quite likely struggled with the temptation not to bother with an argumentative guy like me. I, on the other hand, struggled for a long time with the truth of the gospel and my natural tendency to be prideful and not give in to it’s demands.

The personal decisions we made along the way ended in my receiving Christ – just as God had ordained to take place. My decision was my decision – a “free will” choice that I made. That was the means that God used to bring me to glory.

But it was really God who was at work in me and the people who witnessed to me that brought me to glory.

These are examples of the natural “means” that God uses to bring His purposes to past.

P.S.
I've got issues with this website.

I'm taking too much time to get posts out or changed.

I've got other things to do for the rest of the day so I'm off for now.

I'll likely check in tonight. If the problem continues - I may just give up entirely.

Fair enough.

I started posting here in objection to TulipBee and I must not fall into the trap of thinking others agree with him (her) even if they are biased in some Reformed way.

For me God's Sovereignty and man's responsibility for his own actions is an unfathomable mystery. Many Calvinists say things that for many sound like puppet theory ( I am not saying you have). I could post many famous Calvinists as proof, R C Sproul would be good to quote. This causes a lot of consternation and no end of 'debate' and disagreement over centuries. I think that the foundation of Calvinism is in error, which does NOT mean that non Calvinists have got it right. 500 years ago the religious elite assert the world was flat and cast those who disagreed as heretics

"We people" are a somewhat diverse group in our view on thing theological just is any broad labeled category of theologians is . Take a look at Arminians and other non-Calvinists as a group (even Orthodox and Catholics) if you want to see diversity of belief.

For the record - I'm not a 5 point Calvinist as I have shown many times here. In fact I would have to "caveat" every single point of the acronym "TULIP" if I were to expound the doctrines of grace.

You have made the assumption that I am a "Calvinist". I suppose I can live with that since my view of the will of fallen mankind is more in line with what Calvin taught than that of current so called 5-point Calvinists.

When people debate "free will", they have to make sure what each person means by the term.

But I'm not up to rewriting the many works that have been written about the "bondage of the will" and such. You'll have to go elsewhere for that.

I am using it here in the generic sense. That is to say that fallen men can and do make meaningful choices of their own volition. The same is true for regenerated men.

The sovereign, secret, and decreed will of God is not same as His expressed will.

Considerations of predestination belong to the former.

We don't know what was predestined by God until it comes to past. The secret things belong to God. What is revealed belongs to us. Once something comes to past - we can say with certainty that it was predestined to take place (in the sovereign decreed, and predestined, plan of God).

This is one reason that Calvinists have been among the most evangelical minded Christians in history. They don't presume to know who or what God has in store as far as any event - such as the eventual salvation of any particular person. They just know that they are to preach the gospel and God will give the increase as He has sees fit.

I started posting here in objection to TulipBee and I must not fall into the trap of thinking others agree with him (her) even if they are biased in some Reformed way.

For me God's Sovereignty and man's responsibility for his own actions is an unfathomable mystery. Many Calvinists say things that for many sound like puppet theory ( I am not saying you have). I could post many famous Calvinists as proof, R C Sproul would be good to quote. This causes a lot of consternation and no end of 'debate' and disagreement over centuries. I think that the foundation of Calvinism is in error, which does NOT mean that non Calvinists have got it right. 500 years ago the religious elite assert the world was flat and cast those who disagreed as heretics. Obviously these elite were wrong as we know know. I think eventually the same will happen with several doctrines regarding reprobation.

Nobdysfool made a good point a few posts back. He said (not quoting direct) we should not be against each other but fighting satan. Absolutely right; though I do not think it will happen until the not so extreme of Calvinism and Arminianism come to some kind of understanding. A problem made worse by many who talk e.g like Tulipbee.

 

[Patmos]

BTW

I am having problems with the website as well. When replying ir keeps asking me if I am a robot. The cheek!

 

[Patmos]

It seemed like you were. My apologies for misunderstanding what you were asking.



For one thing, if you took a look at my profile and avatar, you would not find me claiming to be a Calvinist. While there are points of Calvinism i agree with (or at least don't have an issue with), there are places where I diverge from a hard-line Calvinist position. The reason I seem to support their theology has to do more with the gross misrepresentation of that theology that i see so many tossing out here, as though it were true, when anyone with a good understanding of Calvinism would see right away that what is being claimed as Calvinist theology is a bogus as a $3 bill, and the fact that i have studied the Scriptures for years, and have drawn my own conclusions, which I believe are from the Holy Spirit, as it is He who will lead us into all truth.

It irritates me when some people throw out observations and claims about Calvinism that are so clearly false, and I can guess that they are getting this junk from anti-Calvinist websites and writings, and exercising zero discernment about it, because those sources are telling them what they want to hear. They don't seem to realize that what they're doing is the equivalent of talking to a Cadillac dealer about the features and benefits of buying a Lincoln. They are not getting unbiased info, and Truth cannot be obtained from faulty, biased sources.

My advice to you is to quit worrying so much about what others are saying, and study to show yourself approved, rightly dividing the Word of Truth, and realize it is a process, not an event. We all have blind spots in our theology, myself included. We're all learning, or should be. I try not to speak about things that i am not settled on, which is why I very rarely, if ever, speak on matters of Eschatology. Marvin and I have had some good discussions, and I find that our views have a lot of similarities. Not 100%, but I don't think he expects that of me, and I don't of him. We are responsible for what we say and post, not for what others say and post.

Thanks Nobdysfool

I do try to quit worrying what others say. Dead hard though.

Be blessed.

 

[EmSw]

Sounds like 'The Matrix'

The Blue Pill or the Red Pill?

 

[Marvin Knox]

BTW

I am having problems with the website as well. When replying ir keeps asking me if I am a robot. The cheek!

Me too.

I think the reason it keeps asking us if we're robots is because this is a predominately Arminian website. I haven't been accused of being a puppet yet though.

I've got a few more thoughts on predestination that would be for both you and "brotherjerry". Hopefully he's still around and lurking. He's got a good attitude about discussing such things just as you do - even though you both disagree with the notion.

I'll get to it when I find the time. Maybe this evening - but more likely next day. These subjects takes a lot of time and thought to present lest they be misunderstood.

That's the problem with a discussion format like this. We try to make our deep points pithy when they really need a virtual dissertation to do them justice.

 

[EmSw]

The sovereign, secret, and decreed will of God is not same as His expressed will.

Considerations of predestination belong to the former.

We don't know what was predestined by God until it comes to past. The secret things belong to God. What is revealed belongs to us. Once something comes to past - we can say with certainty that it was predestined to take place (in the sovereign decreed, and predestined, plan of God).

Here is the crux of your problem, Marvin. You say predestination belongs to the former. How in the world do you know He has a 'secret' will? How do you know His 'secret' will has anything with predestination? How do you know anything about His 'secret' will? Calvinists act like the 'secret' will of God is their domain. If God gave man an absolute free will according to His 'secret' will, how would you know, and why would Calvinists fight against what they don't know?

Also, would God's expressed will oppose His 'secret' will? Do the 'four' wills of God act in concert or in opposition? Is God a schizophrenic, that is, a condition characterized by conflicting qualities, attitudes, or activities? We know God's expressed will is that He is not willing that any should perish. Are His other wills opposed to this?

Also, is it expressly written that God has 'four' wills, or is this part of His 'secret' will? If secret things belong to God, how is it anyone would presume to know anything about secret things?

This is one reason that Calvinists have been among the most evangelical minded Christians in history. They don't presume to know who or what God has in store as far as any event - such as the eventual salvation of any particular person. They just know that they are to preach the gospel and God will give the increase as He has sees fit.

Calvinist do presume to know what God has in store. Why are you telling us you don't? Here are the very words of the WCF -

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.

Is this God's 'secret' will? His 'decreed' will? This sure isn't His expressed will. Again, do we have a schizophrenic God?

 

[FreeGrace2]

BTW

I am having problems with the website as well. When replying ir keeps asking me if I am a robot. The cheek!

Maybe it thinks you are a Calvinst. You know, God makes all the choices for you.