There is no Free Will PERIOD

[Rose_bud]

I wasn't a "Calvinist" until someone challenged me on the very topic of God's sovereignty. I did not have a predetermined theological framework. All I wanted to know was what was the right view of God, monergism or synergism? I happened to think this is very important. That simple question caused me to spend over two years rereading the Bible from a monergism view (I was a synergist before), looking through church and secular history, reading through the early writings of the church, and studying creeds and councils. And here's a secret-I haven't even finished reading Calvin.

But if I may share a brief personal testimony, I always had an issue with "free will" besides it not mentioned in the Bible. The reason being is that I never made an outward choice to follow God. I thought I was a pretty good person and many confirmed that around me. I believed the church was filled with hypocrites. There was no message. No sermon. No walking down the aisle. One day I just realized that I was the hypocrite simply by looking at my own heart. Despite how well I may look on the outside, I am only beginning to understand the depths of my depravity on the inside. The scales fell off my eyes. So my conversion, if I was honest, never lined up to this "making a choice for God". It wasn't until 30+ years later that I understood my conversion was monergistic. It was because God turned me around. And I suspect, if I read your testimony, you would probably be telling me you were going in this direction, BUT GOD turned you around as well.

Thank you Harley, for sharing this. I'm glad God got a hold of you and changed you into a new creation. Yes, we all have a story of God's great love and grace in our lives, and it's a testament to His patient and persistent pursuit of us. It's heartbreaking that some people may choose to reject God's love and drawing, but that doesn't diminish the reality of His sovereignty and grace. As the scripture says, "God desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth".
Our stories of redemption and transformation serve as a witness to God's power and love, and may they encourage and inspire others to respond to His drawing. And for those who have not yet responded, we pray that God would continue to pursue them with His love and grace..
However, the responding I'm referring to is not only making a choice, as in a response to an altar call, or even realizing our sinfulness before Him, but rather the acknowledgment that He is God. While God initiates the pursuit, I believe some distort, pervert, or suppress that innate knowledge of Him. Whilst for others, it becomes a catalyst for seeking Him. Where some might ask, "Why am I here?", "What is my purpose?", "Who made all of creation?" etc.

If I may share a bit of my story. For me, I realized God as a reality at a young age. I can't remember exactly, but probably around 6 or 7 years old. It wasn't the horror of my person or nature that made me aware of Him. It was as a result of our circumstances and the result of my mother's prayer that day. He uses all things for His glory, even the suffering of His saints. We had no food; it was late, and we were hungry, so as kids, we turned to her. I remember her words, imprinted on my memory... "He will not forsake the righteous and let us go to bed hungry." We waited, nagged, and moaned, being hungry kids. But before we went to bed that night, we heard a knock on the door. The neighbor, a Christian, said... "She doesn't know why, but she just felt she needed to bring this food to my family." It was fish and bread. That day I knew. I knew He was real, and that He cared and provided. I was oblivious to my "sin". But I held that thought as a treasure in my heart. I had a knowledge of Him that I couldn't deny. Even so God continued his pursuit, until later, after much "kicking against the goads," did I understand and accept that He was also the same God who provided for my failures and died for my rebellion. I yielded and surrendered. God always is. I had no excuse. And I agree, as I look to Him, I realize my dependence and inadequacy to behold His glory. So likewise, if you ask anyone not to first reflect "inwards" but rather "upwards" to God, you'll be surprised that He is persistant in His love. And indeed we have no excuse.

From both our stories, I can only realize that the depths of God are truly amazing and profoundly complex. I wouldn't have it any other way..to serve a God limited to only my understanding is a very small God indeed.

It wasn't hard for me to read the Scriptures from the monergistic viewpoint of how we are all evil and bound in sin. I know from firsthand.

So I would suggest that you are predisposed to a particular theological framework unless you have objectively studied church history and doctrine. I had a Sunday School teacher who would always skip over any verse that had to do with "predestined" or "elect", simply because he couldn't explain it. While you want to go back in Acts, that verse in Acts 13:48 is a sticking point and is best to be ignored or "..we need the whole counsel of God" which is simply another way of ignoring the text. It reminds me of my Sunday School teacher who wanted to say, "Yes, but..."

I appreciate your views, but I want to gently point out that you're making an assumption about my theological predispositions. But regarding Acts 13:48, while I may have initial thoughts or leanings, you are correct in this. My primary presuppositions is coming to the text with the understanding that it is a continuous and unified story, culminating in Christ as a fulfillment to God's promise to Abraham that all nations will be blessed. That meaning is discovered considering the immediate and broader context of scripture. I may be biased in this, but I do believe this to be a good hermeneutical principle to hold in this passage. Although I'm also aware that its a dynamic process.

Here is another secret. You will never be able to fully understand the Gospel of John, the Book of Romans, and much of the Old Testament without the understanding that it is God who chooses people. He chosed the nation of Israel. He chosed Moses. He chosed Judah. He chosed David. He chosed Samuel. He chosed Matthew. He chosed Paul. On and on and on.

"You did not choose me, but I chose you." (John 15:16) Seems pretty straight forward.

While I agree that God's sovereignty in choosing individuals is an important aspect of the biblical narrative. I'll venture to make an assumption about your presupposition. That this "secret" is your presupposition. A reading into the scripture, that because God has chosen a specific group of individuals to ensure that the lineage of the Promised Seed remains uncompromised. Romans and other scriptures seems to imply that therefore God has predestined a select and limited number of individuals for eternal life. To discover the real meaning the authors intended, this bias should be challenged as well.

 

[HarleyER]

This is an exaggeration of our sinful nature. God commanded thou shalt not murder. How many people did you murder before you came to Christ? I’m guessing zero. Our sinful nature means that we can’t live a perfect life free of sin. Has that changed after you came to Christ? Are you now able to live a perfect life free of sin? I still can’t, no matter how hard I try I still fail sometimes, but the difference is I do try not to sin now whereas before it didn’t bother me as much. We’ve been given the Holy Spirit who convicts us of our sin causing us to refrain from it. Before we came to Christ we still refrained from sin but not as much because we didn’t care whether we sinned or not. We didn’t go around punching everyone we met in the face or stealing everything in sight because of earthly consequences but now our expectations are higher because have a genuine love for God so we don’t take pleasure in doing the things that displeases Him. That’s the difference between the natural man and the regenerated man.

"This is an exaggeration of our sinful nature."

No, it is not. Christ tells us we're evil.

Matthew 7:11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!

Matthew 5:28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

It is out of the heart that we sin, not our action. So just any evil thought against someone is just as much a sin as if you had done the sin in God's eyes. Grant it, there is a distinction between thinking something and actually acting upon it. But in the end it is all sin in God's eyes.

 

[HarleyER]

Here you go:
Calvinist theologian James White, in a debate with Hank Hannegraaf and George Bryson, was asked, “When a child is raped, is God responsible and did He decree that rape?” To which Mr. White replied:

*** “Yes, because if not then it’s meaningless and purposeless and though God knew it was going to happen he created it without a purpose… and God is responsible for the creation of despair… If He didn‟t [decree child rape] then that rape is an element of meaningless evil that has no purpose.” (James White, Why it is Important to Go Back to the Sources, Illustrated.)

No, God is not the author of evil, nor does He cause it. This issue is not whether we were dead in our sins and trespasses. The Bible has settled that; our experience has taught us this is true. The issue, in this case, would be whether He raised us spiritually and then *forced us to be saved or whether He raised us to a spiritual life that we may consider that which we could not before. The latter means that all men will have the appeal of God and be given the light they need to consider it. In the end, it will be the free will (freed by God) choice of every man to resist or submit that will seal their eternal fate.

*Force can either be violent or manipulation of the mind of an individual to choose what He desires they should choose.

This is horrible. To think that God would have a purpose in visiting evil on a child is not a God of love. All of the crime and evil comes from man's heart, not God's.

He said Absolutely!!

The Holy Spirit convicts everyone. That is what the bible says. Some will respond, and some will reject the gift, but it will be done by the free will God granted them by the death of His son. The light which lights every man to be born into this earth.

I'd have to go back through the posts. But from what I can see I stated, "Calvinism doesn't say that God planned all of the evil that will ever happen." That is NOT the same as ordaining what will happen. Ordaining is that God allows things to happen for His divine purpose. I would, however, add that God DOES purposely cause these things to happen to carry out His divine plan and will.

"This is horrible. To think that God would have a purpose in visiting evil on a child is not a God of love. "

I would also suggest you go back and reread the Old Testament. There are many, many places where God purposely destroys whole families for sin such as the rebellion of Korah, put lying spirits in the mouths of false prophets so Ahab would go off to battle and die, ordained the conditions for the people of Israel to eat their children, and even have a bear come out of the woods and kill forty children simply for taunting Elisha. And we won't even mention the destruction of the world in the great flood. I could go on and on.

You have a false or, at the very least, an incomplete understanding of God. God is a God of love. This is God's essence. But God is Holy. He is not one to be trifled with. At the same time God is also a God of righteous wrath and vengeance. He will execute this wrath when He feel the time is right.

 

[HarleyER]

In this situation God didn’t control Ahab’s choice, He deceived Ahab into making the choice. Why would He have needed a spirit to deceive Ahab if He is already controlling his every thought and decision?

Because God is NOT the author of sin, as we have stated. God is not a deceiver. Satan is the deceiver. Just as God allowed Satan to inflict Job, so God USES all things to bring about His will including Satan deception of the world.

God ordained. The demons obeyed. Bye-bye Ahab.

 

[HarleyER]

How would God know our choices before they’re made? I don’t know why you’re asking me this. The answer should be astronomically obvious if God exists in all time simultaneously. How would He not know everything that will ever happen if He exists in all time simultaneously?

God knows all things because He ordained all things. He didn't look through His roladex to find out what Cyrus would do and then tell it to Isaiah so that he could prophesy it 150 years earlier.

If it is a "choice" that you can make, and it hasn't been made as of yet, then it really isn't much of a choice is it?

 

[zoidar]

Do you think there are any neutral desires? I don't.

I don't know what makes you choose coffee. But I do know that if you are in fellowship with Christ, and you choose coffee, whatsoever is of faith is not sin. And by that, I don't mean one has to study the question of whether they are acting in faith, or whether it is the Lord's will that they have some, before deciding if coffee is a suitable choice. It is not the choice that makes the difference, but the heart.

But if I was to guess, you have, (among myriad other causes), had positive experiences with coffee, and a barely conscious notion of how it makes you feel, or otherwise affects you —i.e. you are reasonably sure you would enjoy some— and you see it would take relatively little effort to obtain some, and on and on.

Ok, but none of what you descibe makes me by certainty choose coffee. You can have all you describe and still choose tea. Your job is to prove that you have no power to choose what your inclination will be.

If you are inclined to love Christ, you will enjoy it with him. If you are inclined to rebel, you will enjoy it without him.

I won't argue about that, though I think it's an oversimplified or an incomplete picture.

Maybe some other example would be more useful to directly answer your question. Prayer?

 

[HarleyER]

We're in agreement then, that God is not responsible for our hard hearts and rejection of Him. Instead, He graciously draws us to Himself, despite our natural tendency towards rebellion. Just as the Israelites responded to God's revelation with either acceptance or rejection, we too have the capacity to choose. When God's self-revelation confronts our rebellious nature, it prompts us to either surrender and yield to His will or resist His grace.

"We're in agreement then, that God is not responsible for our hard hearts and rejection of Him."

Correct. I've never seen a controversy here and we would both agree with this statement.

Where the problem arises is who is responsible for our salvation, God (monergism) or man (synergism)? Who changes our condition? If our hearts are hard and rebellious, and we are dead in our sins, then the only way for us to be saved is for God to make us alive and God must give us a new hearts. God must initiate this and, once initiated, He brings us under the conviction of sin, righteousness, and judgement. We don't receive a new heart first and then make a decision. Nor can we make a decision in our old nature and receive a new heart because we are rebellious. We must receive a new heart first, and then we WILL follow Christ for we are now slaves to righteousness.

What you are saying is that when God's confronts us with our rebellious nature, then we make some type of decision to this confrontation. But, as we both agree, we can't do that if we are rebellious, hard-hearted, and dead in our sins. Our very nature makes it impossible to objectively make a decision for Christ.

Also, just looking around at the world should tell you that God does not confront every one of us as you're insinuating. There are many places that never hear the gospel and the people don't know about Christ. So, your example has limitations if you want to say this opportunity is given to everyone. It is not.

 

[Mercy Shown]

I'd have to go back through the posts. But from what I can see I stated, "Calvinism doesn't say that God planned all of the evil that will ever happen." That is NOT the same as ordaining what will happen. Ordaining is that God allows things to happen for His divine purpose. I would, however, add that God DOES purposely cause these things to happen to carry out His divine plan and will.

Yes, I would agree. Nothing happens that he disallows.

"This is horrible. To think that God would have a purpose in visiting evil on a child is not a God of love. "

I would also suggest you go back and reread the Old Testament. There are many, many places where God purposely destroys whole families for sin such as the rebellion of Korah, put lying spirits in the mouths of false prophets so Ahab would go off to battle and die, ordained the conditions for the people of Israel to eat their children, and even have a bear come out of the woods and kill forty children simply for taunting Elisha. And we won't even mention the destruction of the world in the great flood. I could go on and on.

There is a problem with knowing what God did and what the writers thought he did in the OT. If we take the OT record as read and apply it to God, then we do not have an omnipotent God. We have a God who repents or regrets his previous actions. (Genesis 6:6-7 and 1 Samuel 15:11). We also have a God who needs to come down at times to see what is happening. (Gen 11:5) He can be provoked (Jeremiah 7:19), which is quite interesting for a God who predetermines and controls everything. Provoked by what He designed to happen???

I could go on, but I think you get the point. The way God is portrayed in some of the OT is not that of an all-knowing God. We could pick and choose according to our own bias since a man's ways are right in his own eyes, but that would be unwise.

You have a false or, at the very least, an incomplete understanding of God.

I wonder who gave you the authority and knowledge to make such a statement. God is my Abba, my dear father.

God is a God of love. This is God's essence. But God is Holy. He is not one to be trifled with. At the same time God is also a God of righteous wrath and vengeance. He will execute this wrath when He feel the time is right.

People put God into human skin all the time. They imagine God's wrath to be the same as theirs. But God's thoughts and ways are not our ways. As High as the heavens are above the earth, so are his ways and thoughts above ours.

What has God to be angry at since everything goes as He plans? Calvinism's concepts of God are skewed to the point of having an omnipotent God plan out things in every detail, and then when it happens the way He planned, He gets angry. Go figure...

 

[BNR32FAN]

God knows all things because He ordained all things. He didn't look through His roladex to find out what Cyrus would do and then tell it to Isaiah so that he could prophesy it 150 years earlier.

If it is a "choice" that you can make, and it hasn't been made as of yet, then it really isn't much of a choice is it?

This is contradictory to what you said in the previous post.

Because God is NOT the author of sin, as we have stated. God is not a deceiver. Satan is the deceiver. Just as God allowed Satan to inflict Job, so God USES all things to bring about His will including Satan deception of the world.

God ordained. The demons obeyed. Bye-bye Ahab.

In this post you’re saying that God ordains everything. Ordain means to order or decree which means if God is ordering and decreeing sinful actions then He absolutely is the author of sin because it makes Him the very source of sin. If God orders or decrees a sinful action then that action originated from God. Causing all things to work together for the good of those who love God means that when bad things happen He causes those situations to work for the good of those who loves Him. It does not mean that He orders people to sin.

 

[HarleyER]

Thank you Harley, for sharing this. I'm glad God got a hold of you and changed you into a new creation. Yes, we all have a story of God's great love and grace in our lives, and it's a testament to His patient and persistent pursuit of us. It's heartbreaking that some people may choose to reject God's love and drawing, but that doesn't diminish the reality of His sovereignty and grace. As the scripture says, "God desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth".
Our stories of redemption and transformation serve as a witness to God's power and love, and may they encourage and inspire others to respond to His drawing. And for those who have not yet responded, we pray that God would continue to pursue them with His love and grace..
However, the responding I'm referring to is not only making a choice, as in a response to an altar call, or even realizing our sinfulness before Him, but rather the acknowledgment that He is God. While God initiates the pursuit, I believe some distort, pervert, or suppress that innate knowledge of Him. Whilst for others, it becomes a catalyst for seeking Him. Where some might ask, "Why am I here?", "What is my purpose?", "Who made all of creation?" etc.

If I may share a bit of my story. For me, I realized God as a reality at a young age. I can't remember exactly, but probably around 6 or 7 years old. It wasn't the horror of my person or nature that made me aware of Him. It was as a result of our circumstances and the result of my mother's prayer that day. He uses all things for His glory, even the suffering of His saints. We had no food; it was late, and we were hungry, so as kids, we turned to her. I remember her words, imprinted on my memory... "He will not forsake the righteous and let us go to bed hungry." We waited, nagged, and moaned, being hungry kids. But before we went to bed that night, we heard a knock on the door. The neighbor, a Christian, said... "She doesn't know why, but she just felt she needed to bring this food to my family." It was fish and bread. That day I knew. I knew He was real, and that He cared and provided. I was oblivious to my "sin". But I held that thought as a treasure in my heart. I had a knowledge of Him that I couldn't deny. Even so God continued his pursuit, until later, after much "kicking against the goads," did I understand and accept that He was also the same God who provided for my failures and died for my rebellion. I yielded and surrendered. God always is. I had no excuse. And I agree, as I look to Him, I realize my dependence and inadequacy to behold His glory. So likewise, if you ask anyone not to first reflect "inwards" but rather "upwards" to God, you'll be surprised that He is persistant in His love. And indeed we have no excuse.

From both our stories, I can only realize that the depths of God are truly amazing and profoundly complex. I wouldn't have it any other way..to serve a God limited to only my understanding is a very small God indeed.

I appreciate your views, but I want to gently point out that you're making an assumption about my theological predispositions. But regarding Acts 13:48, while I may have initial thoughts or leanings, you are correct in this. My primary presuppositions is coming to the text with the understanding that it is a continuous and unified story, culminating in Christ as a fulfillment to God's promise to Abraham that all nations will be blessed. That meaning is discovered considering the immediate and broader context of scripture. I may be biased in this, but I do believe this to be a good hermeneutical principle to hold in this passage. Although I'm also aware that its a dynamic process.

While I agree that God's sovereignty in choosing individuals is an important aspect of the biblical narrative. I'll venture to make an assumption about your presupposition. That this "secret" is your presupposition. A reading into the scripture, that because God has chosen a specific group of individuals to ensure that the lineage of the Promised Seed remains uncompromised. Romans and other scriptures seems to imply that therefore God has predestined a select and limited number of individuals for eternal life. To discover the real meaning the authors intended, this bias should be challenged as well.

Thank you RB for a very beautiful testimory. It is always a delight to me to hear how God moves in another person's life.

I'll venture to make an assumption about your presupposition. That this "secret" is your presupposition. A reading into the scripture, that because God has chosen a specific group of individuals to ensure that the lineage of the Promised Seed remains uncompromised.

Actually my choice between monergism and synergism came down to my desire to know what was the actual view of the early church. Without going into much detail, the western view was monergism. The eastern view (Eastern Orthodox) was synergism. If I were to be true to a synergistic approached, then I felt I should become Orthodox which, I feel, holds a true synergistic view.

From what I read in the Bible, the church canons and creeds, and history, I believe the Reformers were correct in their monergistic approached. This monergistic view was codified in the:

Westminster Confession of Faith 1646 (Presbyterian) The Westminster Confession​

and the

London Baptist Confession of Faith (Baptist) of 1689. 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith in Modern English - Founders Ministries​

Both of these confessions came out independent of each other and around the same time. Surprisingly, working independent of the other, they are very similar in view and represents the thoughts of great men of God who saw the Catholic Church in error.

So my reading of the scripture is not bias or prejudicial on the way I am interpreting the Scriptures. I'm not that bright. Rather, my interpretation of the Scriptures is that I've looked at what was the official viewpoint of the Protestant church during the time of the Reformation and then measured their views against what the Scriptures have to say. Thankfully, they left Scriptural references to how they formed their conclusions.

You will not find a synergistic document with a systematic approach to the Scriptures as detailed as the Westminster Confession or London Baptist Confession. So while I understand that while you feel you've looked at the "whole council" of Scripture, you're basing your views on what YOU feel is a correct interpretation of Scriptures. You have to measure your interpretation with historical interpretation to ensure you are correct in your views.

I would suggest just reading through the Westminster Confession of Faith and London Baptist Confession of Faith to see if there is anything that you might find wrong.

 

[HarleyER]

Yes, I would agree. Nothing happens that he disallows.

There is a problem with knowing what God did and what the writers thought he did in the OT. If we take the OT record as read and apply it to God, then we do not have an omnipotent God. We have a God who repents or regrets his previous actions. (Genesis 6:6-7 and 1 Samuel 15:11). We also have a God who needs to come down at times to see what is happening. (Gen 11:5) He can be provoked (Jeremiah 7:19), which is quite interesting for a God who predetermines and controls everything. Provoked by what He designed to happen???

I could go on, but I think you get the point. The way God is portrayed in some of the OT is not that of an all-knowing God. We could pick and choose according to our own bias since a man's ways are right in his own eyes, but that would be unwise.

I wonder who gave you the authority and knowledge to make such a statement. God is my Abba, my dear father.

People put God into human skin all the time. They imagine God's wrath to be the same as theirs. But God's thoughts and ways are not our ways. As High as the heavens are above the earth, so are his ways and thoughts above ours.

What has God to be angry at since everything goes as He plans? Calvinism's concepts of God are skewed to the point of having an omnipotent God plan out things in every detail, and then when it happens the way He planned, He gets angry. Go figure...

"The way God is portrayed in some of the OT is not that of an all-knowing God. "

And there you go! Bingo! This is where all the love, love, love crap leads you. Just toss out the Old Testament because certainly this can't be what God is like. Thomas Jefferson did the same thing as well as part of the NT. Whenever, he didn't like something in the Bible he just cut it out. About 10 percent of his Bible was missing.

We have a God who repents or regrets his previous actions....

As far as God "repenting", this is from our perspective. It's not, "Oops, looks like I goof on making this man thing." In the case of the flood, God was sorry He had to destroy everyone but it was necessary. It is an example for what He is about to do at the close of this age. But I'm not about to go through every case in the Old Testament that you reject as untrue, or at least you believe the writer didn't get right. There is absolutely no benefit if you can't accept the OT.

What has God to be angry at since everything goes as He plans?

His plan is to bring glory to Himself and to share His glory with His people. God's anger is reserved for the rest. If we did not know God's anger, we would never understand how great is His mercy.

 

[HarleyER]

This is contradictory to what you said in the previous post.


In this post you’re saying that God ordains everything. Ordain means to order or decree which means if God is ordering and decreeing sinful actions then He absolutely is the author of sin because it makes Him the very source of sin. If God orders or decrees a sinful action then that action originated from God. Causing all things to work together for the good of those who love God means that when bad things happen He causes those situations to work for the good of those who loves Him. It does not mean that He orders people to sin.

Here are what the Westminster and London Baptist Confession of Faith states that might make it clearer than my writings:

Westminster Confession of Faith
Chapter 3 God’s Eternal Decrees

1. From all eternity and by the completely wise and holy purpose of his own will, God has freely and unchangeably ordained whatever happens.1 This ordainment does not mean, however, that God is the author of sin (he is not), 2 that he represses the will of his created beings, or that he takes away the freedom or contingency of secondary causes. Rather, the will of created beings and the freedom and contingency of secondary causes are established by him.3

1. Eph 1.11, Rom 11.33, Heb 6.17, Rom 9.15,18, Acts 4.27-28, Mt 10.29-30, Eph 2.10, Is 45.6-7.
2. Jas 1.13-14, 17, 1 Jn 1.5, Eccl 7.29, Ps 5.4.
3. Acts 2.23, Mt 17.12, Acts 4.27-28, Jn 19.11, Prv 16.33, Acts 27.23-24, 34, 44.

https://epc.org/wp-content/uploads/Files/1-Who-We-Are/B-About-The-EPC/WCF-ModernEnglish.pdf

LONDON BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH 1689
Chapter 3: Of God's Decrees

1._____ God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.

( Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 9:15, 18; James 1:13; 1 John 1:5; Acts 4:27, 28; John 19:11; Numbers 23:19; Ephesians 1:3-5 )

https://www.grbc.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/The-1689-Baptist-Confession-of-Faith.pdf

It would be helpful to read through the confession as I base much of my views on these Protestant confessions. However, I find that most Protestants can't bother themselves with understanding their roots.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Here are what the Westminster and London Baptist Confession of Faith states that might make it clearer than my writings:

Westminster Confession of Faith
Chapter 3 God’s Eternal Decrees

1. From all eternity and by the completely wise and holy purpose of his own will, God has freely and unchangeably ordained whatever happens.1 This ordainment does not mean, however, that God is the author of sin (he is not), 2 that he represses the will of his created beings, or that he takes away the freedom or contingency of secondary causes. Rather, the will of created beings and the freedom and contingency of secondary causes are established by him.3

1. Eph 1.11, Rom 11.33, Heb 6.17, Rom 9.15,18, Acts 4.27-28, Mt 10.29-30, Eph 2.10, Is 45.6-7.
2. Jas 1.13-14, 17, 1 Jn 1.5, Eccl 7.29, Ps 5.4.
3. Acts 2.23, Mt 17.12, Acts 4.27-28, Jn 19.11, Prv 16.33, Acts 27.23-24, 34, 44.

https://epc.org/wp-content/uploads/Files/1-Who-We-Are/B-About-The-EPC/WCF-ModernEnglish.pdf

LONDON BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH 1689
Chapter 3: Of God's Decrees

1._____ God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.

( Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 9:15, 18; James 1:13; 1 John 1:5; Acts 4:27, 28; John 19:11; Numbers 23:19; Ephesians 1:3-5 )

https://www.grbc.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/The-1689-Baptist-Confession-of-Faith.pdf

It would be helpful to read through the confession as I base much of my views on these Protestant confessions. However, I find that most Protestants can't bother themselves with understanding their roots.

I still don’t see any explanation of how God orders or decrees sin without actually being the originator of the action. The act of sin originates from the decree and is then carried out by the one being ordered to execute said sin. It’s like if I were to say I ordered the attack but it wasn’t really my idea. It’s a contradicting statement. God ordered the sin but He’s not the author of it, the only way He is not the author of it is if it wasn’t His idea. Whoever came up with the idea to commit the sin is the author of the sin. You can’t say it was God’s idea but He’s not the author because that’s a direct contradiction.

 

[HarleyER]

I still don’t see any explanation of how God orders or decrees sin without actually being the originator of the action. The act of sin originates from the decree and is then carried out by the one being ordered to execute said sin. It’s like if I were to say I ordered the attack but it wasn’t really my idea. It’s a contradicting statement. God ordered the sin but He’s not the author of it, the only way He is not the author of it is if it wasn’t His idea. Whoever came up with the idea to commit the sin is the author of the sin. You can’t say it was God’s idea but He’s not the author because that’s a direct contradiction.

Well it states it right in the Westminster and Baptist Confession that I posted. Did you even read it and sought to understand what is was saying?

 

[Mercy Shown]

"The way God is portrayed in some of the OT is not that of an all-knowing God. "

And there you go! Bingo! This is where all the love, love, love crap leads you. Just toss out the Old Testament because certainly this can't be what God is like. Thomas Jefferson did the same thing as well as part of the NT. Whenever, he didn't like something in the Bible he just cut it out. About 10 percent of his Bible was missing.

So then you are a believer in a God who regrets His previous actions. A God who regrets what He did. Well at least I know where you stand but I’m always baffled by the ability to hold mutually exclusive ideas in one’s head.

We have a God who repents or regrets his previous actions....

As far as God "repenting", this is from our perspective. It's not, "Oops, looks like I goof on making this man thing." In the case of the flood, God was sorry He had to destroy everyone but it was necessary.

That is not in the Bible. You are changing it to fit your bias. It clearly says that He regretted or repented that He had made man. Not as you portray that He merely was sorry he had to destroy them.

Even with your subjective editing of the word it still leaves the question as to why God would be sorry for something He predestined to happen. Calvinism is a whirl of contradictions.

It is an example for what He is about to do at the close of this age. But I'm not about to go through every case in the Old Testament that you reject as untrue, or at least you believe the writer didn't get right. There is absolutely no benefit if you can't accept the OT.

You assume too much. Of course you still would not go through it because it would destroy your premise.

What has God to be angry at since everything goes as He plans?

His plan is to bring glory to Himself and to share His glory with His people. God's anger is reserved for the rest. If we did not know God's anger, we would never understand how great is His mercy.

You can’t understand God’s anger, no man can . We think it is like ours but it isn’t. How can a God predestine everything and then get mad when it happens?

 

[HarleyER]

So then you are a believer in a God who regrets His previous actions. A God who regrets what He did. Well at least I know where you stand but I’m always baffled by the ability to hold mutually exclusive ideas in one’s head.

That is not in the Bible. You are changing it to fit your bias. It clearly says that He regretted or repented that He had made man. Not as you portray that He merely was sorry he had to destroy them.

Even with your subjective editing of the word it still leaves the question as to why God would be sorry for something He predestined to happen. Calvinism is a whirl of contradictions.

You assume too much. Of course you still would not go through it because it would destroy your premise.

You can’t understand God’s anger, no man can . We think it is like ours but it isn’t. How can a God predestine everything and then get mad when it happens?

I'm not the one who is saying God "regretted" or repented of His actions. You may want to look at the following verse:

Numbers 23:19 “God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?​

What you are abscribing to God is simply a projection of our humanist. God is not like us. I'll stand by with the nunerous commentators on what I stated.

God doesn't get "mad". God "ordains" simply means that God has set in a particular order all things. Thus, Christ came at exactly the right time (in the fullness of time).

 

[Panthers]

Does water ever get to choose its state?
John 19:34
the answer is no!

It's a lie thinking that it does.

 

[Panthers]

No peace is ever found in choosing.
The Prince of Peace, thereby, has already decided.

There is no Free Will, PERIOD!

 

[Panthers]

To reset our parameters correctly, we must consider the universe to be a collection of machines.
(micro, medio, and macro) all working together like a grand watch.
In this grand collection and grand watch, is the grand collector and the grand watchmaker.
Daniel 4:23

Sadly people do not see a machine in the mirror, they see an aging and dying mutant.
What they think they see, they will become.
What they become, everyone will see.

 

[Panthers]

The machine in the mirror is worth a minimum $500,000,000,000 USD. (billion)
The Human Eye based on 550k alone is worth $20,000,000,000 USD, and most have 2.
Matthew 10:31