What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[iwbswiaihl]

It might have been the spade when it was thrown away.

After your reply on this one tells me how to get your goat, if I want to!

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

After your reply on this one tells me how to get your goat, if I want to!

In my younger days I would have been seen as a young buck, but now, at my age, I am more like a desiccated old goat!

 

[Mark Quayle]

God himself spoke of things that may or may not occur. Philosophy aside, that is what the scriptures say. But I know that as a Calvinist you would say he didn't mean that - he couldn't; it would contradict the Calvinist's definition of sovereignty: meticulous control of all that occurs ("every particle of dust is doing exactly what God decreed.")

You may appreciate something I heard RC Sproul say: "God knows all contingencies, but he does not know contingently." While I like that, I don't even agree with someone so eminently Reformed as RC Sproul simply because he is Reformed. I disagree that there are multiple possibilities. If "contingencies" mean possibilities, then I disagree with what Sproul said. God does not know something, if it is not.

But show me where he says something may or may not occur. The only ones that come to mind for me are (to me) him speaking according to our thinking, not saying that more than one thing is possible, but giving us the options from which to decide what to do.

 

[Greg Cheney]

You may appreciate something I heard RC Sproul say: "God knows all contingencies, but he does not know contingently." While I like that, I don't even agree with someone so eminently Reformed as RC Sproul simply because he is Reformed. I disagree that there are multiple possibilities. If "contingencies" mean possibilities, then I disagree with what Sproul said. God does not know something, if it is not.

But show me where he says something may or may not occur. The only ones that come to mind for me are (to me) him speaking according to our thinking, not saying that more than one thing is possible, but giving us the options from which to decide what to do.

Though I know we disagree, I appreciate your "tone." I'll share some verses:

“If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings.” (Jeremiah 26:3) (If...they turn...I will change my mind and course of action - he is saying that what he will do depends on what they will do; that he purposes to bring calamity to them, but he will change his mind if they repent).

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. (Gen. 3:22-23) (Lest he - God is saying if he left him there he would take also of the tree of life - it was clearly a possibility according to God himself)

And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt: (Ex. 13:17) (A range of possibilities was acknowledged by God)

And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land. (Ex. 4:8-9) (God did not say when he doesn't listen, but IF)

For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. (Romans 11:21) (Their fate was not settled)

Therefore, thou son of man, prepare thee stuff for removing, and remove by day in their sight; and thou shalt remove from thy place to another place in their sight: it may be they will consider, though they be a rebellious house. (Ezekiel 12:3) (It may be)

Again, I know you disagree, but these verses (and plenty of others) show God himself speaking of certain events in the sense that they were not foregone conclusions. I know (and I am not saying this in an ugly manner) that you will say that God was just speaking on terms that people can understand, but if he had to do that - who could claim they know when he is doing so or not? Even though you disagree, I hope you at least see that those of us who say that some of the future is settled and some of it is open is because we are taking the scriptures at face value.

 

[zoidar]

How do they use it?

They believe regeneration happens before repentance and not after. They don't believe regeneration and being saved is the same thing, but that regeneration leads to being saved.

 

[zoidar]

One of the main problems I have with God decreeing everything is then no person can be held responsible for what he/she does. If I have been decreed by God to only have the will to eat blueberry pie, how can I then be responsible for eating it. Because it's my choice? But I have been decreed to will to choose it, so then the one who decreed it is responsible. That's simple logic.

The only way to make sense of sin and responsibility is free will, IMO. We are responsible for what we choose, therefore free will exist. Case closed!

It's not having a choice that makes us responsable. Responsibility lies in who is the reason to will something. Am I the reason for my will or God?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Again, I know you disagree, but these verses (and plenty of others) show God himself speaking of certain events in the sense that they were not foregone conclusions. I know (and I am not saying this in an ugly manner) that you will say that God was just speaking on terms that people can understand, but if he had to do that - who could claim they know when he is doing so or not? Even though you disagree, I hope you at least see that those of us who say that some of the future is settled and some of it is open is because we are taking the scriptures at face value.

You ask who could claim they know when he is speaking in terms people can understand. WHY should he speak in terms we can understand? And like that question, WHY should we know when he is speaking in terms people can understand? There is no reason we should know what the foregone conclusions are, so why should he tell us? He actually WANTS us to choose. We are not on his level, to know ahead everything that is going to happen and yet as humans to walk according to what is going to happen. Instead, as with all creation, we do what he has caused to happen.

But beyond that, all the verses you show, while I easily grant that they say that if people do this, he will do that, and if they do the other, he will do another thing, and therefore that what he will do is a result of what they choose to do, these do not show that he has not planned specifically just which thing they will choose and specifically which result of their choice will end up coming to pass. As I said in my last post, and I've been saying all along, the fact he lays before us options from which to choose, does not mean he has not chosen all along which we will choose. The choice is real. But what will actually happen, even as a result of our choice, is pretty obviously only the one thing.

The closest any of the verses you quoted comes to an idea of randomness in what we will choose, at least in English and probably in most English versions (I haven't researched it), in God's use of the term "peradventure" or "perhaps", is in Ex. 13:17 "And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt." But all that word means there is something along the lines of 'lest it come to pass' (that they will change their minds about leaving Egypt) which is not his plan for them at that point.

"If" does not imply randomness, though we infer it.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

You ask who could claim they know when he is speaking in terms people can understand. WHY should he speak in terms we can understand? And like that question, WHY should we know when he is speaking in terms people can understand? There is no reason we should know what the foregone conclusions are, so why should he tell us? He actually WANTS us to choose. We are not on his level, to know ahead everything that is going to happen and yet as humans to walk according to what is going to happen. Instead, as with all creation, we do what he has caused to happen.

But beyond that, all the verses you show, while I easily grant that they say that if people do this, he will do that, and if they do the other, he will do another thing, and therefore that what he will do is a result of what they choose to do, these do not show that he has not planned specifically just which thing they will choose and specifically which result of their choice will end up coming to pass. As I said in my last post, and I've been saying all along, the fact he lays before us options from which to choose, does not mean he has not chosen all along which we will choose. The choice is real. But what will actually happen, even as a result of our choice, is pretty obviously only the one thing.

The closest any of the verses you quoted comes to an idea of randomness in what we will choose, at least in English and probably in most English versions (I haven't researched it), in God's use of the term "peradventure" or "perhaps", is in Ex. 13:17 "And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt." But all that word means there is something along the lines of 'lest it come to pass' (that they will change their minds about leaving Egypt) which is not his plan for them at that point.

"If" does not imply randomness, though we infer it.

Jeremiah 7:31
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Hinnom so they could burn their sons and daughters in the fire--something I never commanded, nor did it even enter My mind.

Jeremiah 19:5
They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal—something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind.

Jeremiah 32:35
They have built the high places of Baal in the Valley of Hinnom to make their sons and daughters pass through the fire to Molech--something I never commanded them, nor had it ever entered My mind, that they should commit such an abomination and cause Judah to sin

 

[Jeff Saunders]

Charles Spurgeon taught that we must put believing the Gospel of Christ and receiving Christ must come first, then sorting out election should come afterward.

Anyone standing before Christ at the Judgment cannot use predestination as a defence, because there are abundant promises and directions to believe the Gospel and that whoever comes to Christ will not be cast out. So the question asked will be, "Why didn't you believe the Gospel and put your faith in Christ?" The reprobate ones will have no answer to that question because they know that they are guilty of ignoring the salvation that was offered to them and that condemnation to Hell is their fault, not God's.

Election and Reprobation are mysteries that are in the mind of God, through His foreknowledge of who is going to believe the Gospel of Christ and who is going to reject it. Regardless of whether He knows already who is going to believe the Gospel of Christ and who is not, for us, believing the Gospel is paramount because heaven or hell for us is dependent on it, rather than a mystery decree in heaven that only God knows the detail of it.

You are making your arguments based on the times we are living in and that you assume that everyone has had the gospel to respond to. What about all those people who lived after Jesus died on the cross and never heard? The New Testament was not even written till years after Jesus died what about all those people? Look at the big picture not just what we think today.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

You are making your arguments based on the times we are living in and that you assume that everyone has had the gospel to respond to. What about all those people who lived after Jesus died on the cross and never heard? The New Testament was not even written till years after Jesus died what about all those people? Look at the big picture not just what we think today.

Romans 1 has all men without excuse and Paul says this with the " gospel " in the context.

Romans 1:16-20
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

 

[Mark Quayle]

One of the main problems I have with God decreeing everything is then no person can be held responsible for what he/she does. If I have been decreed by God to only have the will to eat blueberry pie, how can I then be responsible for eating it. Because it's my choice? But I have been decreed to will to choose it, so then the one who decreed it is responsible. That's simple logic.

Well no. It is logic assuming quite a bit, such as that we are capable of including God's level of understand, knowledge and purposes into our thinking. It is, in the long run, like making time the eternal paradigm.

I like the quote I once heard, I think from CS Lewis, something like, "When the author steps onto the stage, the play is over." At the risk of being accused of saying that this life is not real —this life that Scripture says is like a vapor, (compared to the solid reality of the economy from which God operates)— and at the risk of being accused of anthropomorphism, I like to say, "What if this we live and all that is in it, is only in God's 'imagination', or 'is only real in that God has spoken it'?"

The only way to make sense of sin and responsibility is free will, IMO. We are responsible for what we choose, therefore free will exist. Case closed!

It's not having a choice that makes us responsable. Responsibility lies in who is the reason to will something.

If you want to go there, (that "responsibility lies in who is the reason to will something" (my emphasis)) —from point of view of the sinner, we are that 'who', and not God.

BTW, I do think that is a good, or deep, observation, that {responsibility lies, not in will itself but in who is the reason to will something}. My hat's off to you. I hadn't been able to think of that in words before. I really like that.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Jeremiah 7:31
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Hinnom so they could burn their sons and daughters in the fire--something I never commanded, nor did it even enter My mind.

Jeremiah 19:5
They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal—something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind.

Jeremiah 32:35
They have built the high places of Baal in the Valley of Hinnom to make their sons and daughters pass through the fire to Molech--something I never commanded them, nor had it ever entered My mind, that they should commit such an abomination and cause Judah to sin

I'm guessing, then, that you weren't privy to the recent conversations in this thread (and/or other similar threads) where this verse is brought up. To shorten the post, one version says something like, "nor had it ever entered my mind to command such a thing, that they should do that".

 

[Der Alte]

[QUOTE="Jesus is YHWH, post: 76789188, member: 298273"]

Jeremiah 7:31
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Hinnom so they could burn their sons and daughters in the fire--something I never commanded, nor did it even enter My mind.
Jeremiah 19:5
They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal—something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind.
Jeremiah 32:35
They have built the high places of Baal in the Valley of Hinnom to make their sons and daughters pass through the fire to Molech--something I never commanded them, nor had it ever entered My mind, that they should commit such an abomination and cause Judah to sin

Some folks, i.e. the UR-group, try to make these vss. say that God said "I never commanded them, nor had it ever entered My mind to punish Israel 'in eternal fire.'" But God punishing the disobedient in fire for sacrificing their own children to pagan deities in fire, is not the same thing.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

I'm guessing, then, that you weren't privy to the recent conversations in this thread (and/or other similar threads) where this verse is brought up. To shorten the post, one version says something like, "nor had it ever entered my mind to command such a thing, that they should do that".

The fact is God never ordained it to happen as calvinism teaches. These passages refute meticulous determinism.

 

[zoidar]

The fact is God never ordained it to happen as calvinism teaches. These passages refute meticulous determinism.

I think Mark means God could have ordained it, yet not commanded it.

 

[zoidar]

If you want to go there, (that "responsibility lies in who is the reason to will something" (my emphasis)) —from point of view of the sinner, we are that 'who', and not God.

From the sinner? What I think matters here is what is objectively true.

BTW, I do think that is a good, or deep, observation, that {responsibility lies, not in will itself but in who is the reason to will something}. My hat's off to you. I hadn't been able to think of that in words before. I really like that.

Thanks!

 

[Jeff Saunders]

Romans 1 has all men without excuse and Paul says this with the " gospel " in the context.

Romans 1:16-20
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

So you believe that if a person died a few days after the cross and they were far away from Jerusalem and new nothing of what Jesus did they are without excuses even though they had no way of knowing? Does that sound like a loving act of God? Scripture must be understood through Gods love, but if we don’t understand Gods love we distort what we think scripture is telling us.

 

[Clare73]

If that's not the pot calling the kettle black.....

I see no contradiction.

Demonstration of your assertion?

 

[Clare73]

A bit of humour is good to cool down a thread to stop it going overboard like Jonah, who actually had a whale of a time after that.

Boo-o-o-o!

 

[Clare73]

If I'd have said his name was Dug, and when he lost his space he was renamed "Dugless" would that have made more sense to you?

Indeed!