Anyone have good arguments against Calvinism.

[Hentenza]

Ok, I think this will be helpful to understanding where you are coming from. There are actually various views within Calvinism.

I am not a Calvinist. Here is how I see it. We can then talk over the differences.

• God is Sovereign. Nothing happens outside of His control.
• God created Adam and Eve with the ability to choose, within the parameters He set. He created the world, formed Adam, formed Eve, set them in the garden, with the command not to eat of the fruit. They were upright, as you say. Everything God created was good, per Scripture. And they had the opportunity to fall. But this was legitimate choice. This choice is not outside of God's will, because He is the one that delegated the ability to choose to them. God chose to allow them free choice within parameters.
• God knew what the choice of Adam and Eve would be ahead of time because, per Scripture, He knows the end from the beginning, and because the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. In this regards, God created, knowing that sin would result. But God is Himself without sin, there is no darkness in Him, He is not tempted by evil, etc. as Scripture affirms. He gave man the capacity to sin, but did not decree that they must sin. And He did not create them sinful, because everything He created was good.

To my thinking this does not undermine Sovereignty, and it also maintains the Scriptural statements that God is light, there is no darkness in Him, He is not tempted by evil, etc. God, in His Sovereignty, allows limited choice to man (within certain confines of His choosing). God knew man would choose to fall. And He already chose to send His Son to die, so that in Adam all die, but in Christ all are made alive.

Please spell out where our understandings differ. I am trying to see where the legitimate differences are, and where we may be talking past each other.

Agree.

“Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the Lord, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord. “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭55‬:‭7‬-‭9‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Isaiah 55:7-9 Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. “For My thoughts | New American Standard Bible - NAS

Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. “For My thoughts

bible.com

 

[Clare73]

So conversion is forced !
The choice was coerced.

Willingly choosing what one prefers is not the meaning of coercion. . .plain and simple.

 

[Hazelelponi]

How is something that God designed so that no outher possible thing would happen supposed to reveal why we need such sovereignty? Your twisted view of providence defames the character of God by attributing all sin to Him. You spout off Calvinist proof texts with no concern for the context you rip them out of, and turn God into a moral monster. You speak of humans committing sin and atrocities, but you claim that God has fixed it such that those atrocities were inevitable and somehow His authoring sin, the suffering of innocents, and hell is supposed to bring Him glory? You present Him as worse than the devil.

Fervent,
You asked:

“How is something that God designed so that no other possible thing would happen supposed to reveal why we need such sovereignty?”

It’s not about what we think we need. It’s about what God has revealed about Himself. Scripture doesn't invite us to speculate according to human reasoning but calls us to bow in reverence before His revealed will. “Our God is in the heavens; He does all that He pleases” ' Psalm 115:3. The sovereignty of God isn’t deduced from logic; it’s declared in the Word. And the reason we "need" such sovereignty is because without it, there is no salvation—no assurance that God's promises stand, no guarantee that evil is bounded, no certainty that Christ's cross accomplishes anything.

You accuse me of attributing sin to God. I have not. Sin is man’s—his will, his desire, his rebellion. “Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire” James 1:14. God is never the author of sin, but neither is He surprised by it. He ordains all that comes to pass—including the permission of evil—for the manifestation of His justice, mercy, and glory. That’s not "twisting"; that’s Romans 9.

You say I “spout Calvinist proof texts” without context. Then show me where I’ve misused them. You’ve asserted, but not demonstrated. In contrast, I have quoted the Word. And God’s Word, not emotion or philosophical distaste, has the final say.

You say I turn God into a moral monster. But in truth, it is your position that does so—by implying He was unable to prevent evil, or worse, that He wishes good but fails to bring it to pass. I do not accuse God. I exalt Him as the one who “works all things according to the counsel of His will” Ephesians 1:11 and who “declares the end from the beginning” Isaiah 46:10.

You ask about sin and atrocitiesy.but there's a difference between God’s decree and human responsibility. That something falls within God's decree does not excuse man's actions. The same God who ordained Joseph’s brothers’ betrayal said they meant it for evil, but He meant it for good Genesis 50:20. The cross itself—the most evil act in history—was both predestined by God and carried out by wicked men Acts 4:27-28

As for innocence: “There is none righteous, no, not one” Romans 3:10. We were not neutral beings wrongly punished; we were rebels saved by sheer mercy. The idea that hell is unjust presumes a view of man that Scripture utterly rejects. Hell magnifies God’s justice. Heaven magnifies His grace. Both display His glory.

You ask whether God is glorified even through judgment? Yes. “The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble” Proverbs 16:4. God's justice is not a defect in His character—it is part of His perfection. Wrath is not a blemish on His holiness; it is the outshining of it against sin.

You say I present God as worse than the devil. But I have done no such thing. I have presented the God who gave His own Son for sinners, not because He had to, but because He chose to. That’s not monstrous—it’s staggering mercy. The worst sin ever committed was against God incarnate, and what did He do? He bore wrath for others. He saved a people. He satisfied justice so that mercy might reign. “In this the love of God was made manifest among us..." 1 John 4:9

You’re outraged at the idea that God would ordain all things—including judgment. I am overwhelmed that He would ordain mercy for any of us.

He owed us nothing but gave us Christ. If that doesn’t glorify God, then nothing does.

 

[Fervent]

Fervent,
You asked:




It’s not about what we think we need. It’s about what God has revealed about Himself. Scripture doesn't invite us to speculate according to human reasoning but calls us to bow in reverence before His revealed will. “Our God is in the heavens; He does all that He pleases” ' Psalm 115:3. The sovereignty of God isn’t deduced from logic; it’s declared in the Word. And the reason we "need" such sovereignty is because without it, there is no salvation—no assurance that God's promises stand, no guarantee that evil is bounded, no certainty that Christ's cross accomplishes anything.

You accuse me of attributing sin to God. I have not. Sin is man’s—his will, his desire, his rebellion. “Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire” James 1:14. God is never the author of sin, but neither is He surprised by it. He ordains all that comes to pass—including the permission of evil—for the manifestation of His justice, mercy, and glory. That’s not "twisting"; that’s Romans 9.

You say I “spout Calvinist proof texts” without context. Then show me where I’ve misused them. You’ve asserted, but not demonstrated. In contrast, I have quoted the Word. And God’s Word, not emotion or philosophical distaste, has the final say.

You say I turn God into a moral monster. But in truth, it is your position that does so—by implying He was unable to prevent evil, or worse, that He wishes good but fails to bring it to pass. I do not accuse God. I exalt Him as the one who “works all things according to the counsel of His will” Ephesians 1:11 and who “declares the end from the beginning” Isaiah 46:10.

You ask about sin and atrocitiesy.but there's a difference between God’s decree and human responsibility. That something falls within God's decree does not excuse man's actions. The same God who ordained Joseph’s brothers’ betrayal said they meant it for evil, but He meant it for good Genesis 50:20. The cross itself—the most evil act in history—was both predestined by God and carried out by wicked men Acts 4:27-28

As for innocence: “There is none righteous, no, not one” Romans 3:10. We were not neutral beings wrongly punished; we were rebels saved by sheer mercy. The idea that hell is unjust presumes a view of man that Scripture utterly rejects. Hell magnifies God’s justice. Heaven magnifies His grace. Both display His glory.

You ask whether God is glorified even through judgment? Yes. “The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble” Proverbs 16:4. God's justice is not a defect in His character—it is part of His perfection. Wrath is not a blemish on His holiness; it is the outshining of it against sin.

You say I present God as worse than the devil. But I have done no such thing. I have presented the God who gave His own Son for sinners, not because He had to, but because He chose to. That’s not monstrous—it’s staggering mercy. The worst sin ever committed was against God incarnate, and what did He do? He bore wrath for others. He saved a people. He satisfied justice so that mercy might reign. “In this the love of God was made manifest among us..." 1 John 4:9

You’re outraged at the idea that God would ordain all things—including judgment. I am overwhelmed that He would ordain mercy for any of us.

He owed us nothing but gave us Christ. If that doesn’t glorify God, then nothing does.

You accuse God of willing what He would not have, spin it how you want but you make Him the author of sin and in fact the only sinner and your denials fall flat. You cannot claim that man invariably does what God has decreed and then attribute carrying out what God has determined on man, any more than David could have denied he murdered Uriah simply because he only gave the orders and was not the instrument. Human beings under your view of God are nothing more than puppets.

You present God as the designer of every atrocity, not only by decreeing it from eternity past but your view demands that even in such a design God's glory must be revealed. You refer to justice, but then paint God as the most unjust being possible and render a mockery of Christ's sacrifice.

 

[Hazelelponi]

You present God as the designer of every atrocity,

You present nothing from Scripture, you accuse me of lies and speak of God badly.

I will not participate in any farther. I will not speak any further with people who don't revere God in their speaking.

 

[Fervent]

You present nothing from Scripture, you accuse me of lies and speak of God badly.

I will not participate in any farther. I will not speak any further with people who don't revere God in their speaking.

I'm not speaking poorly of God, I'm speaking poorly of Calvin's abomination. And I'm not presenting Scriptural referents because I'm not interested in a battle of proof texts, and I doubt you'd engage with understanding your proof texts within their proper context so there's not much sense breaking down the abuses you rely on.

 

[Fervent]

Since ypu have repeatedly blasphemed the God of Scripture, the God of all creation, with nothing but your opinion in hand for why you disagree with a presentation of Scriptures themselves I think we can safely say this conversation is fully over.

It is not I who blasphemes God by rendering Him the author of sin taking glory from atrocities.

 

[tall73]

That something falls within God's decree does not excuse man's actions.

For man to be responsible he has to make choices. Does that mean that, however you see God's decree, that there is still room for people to choose something, thereby having accountability?

Certainly God planned the cross. God planned for Joseph to be in Egypt, both examples that you noted.

He also used the choices of sinful men, which they did not intend for good, to glorify Himself.

But is your view that they were determined to be evil to begin with?

To use an extreme example, if an assassin designed a robot programmed to kill anything that moved, and put it in position to take out his target, would the robot be responsible if it killed the target? Wouldn't the one who built the robot be responsible?

I don't think that Adam and Eve were programmed to sin. As you mentioned, I think they had the capacity to do so, but chose to sin.

In that respect they are responsible for their actions.

Since the fall things get a bit more complicated, due to sin now being in the world, and that gets into a whole other discussion of the nature of the fall, and post-fall anthropology.

But if Adam and Eve had a choice, then that means that God can still be sovereign,, yet allow for choice within the parameters He set.

If Adam and Eve had no choice, how are they any different than the robot? How can they have responsibility?

 

[Fervent]

For man to be responsible he has to make choices. Does that mean that, however you see God's decree, that there is still room for people to choose something, thereby having accountability?

Certainly God planned the cross. God planned for Joseph to be in Egypt, both examples that you noted.

He also used the choices of sinful men, which they did not intend for good, to glorify Himself.

But is your view that they were determined to be evil to begin with?

To use an extreme example, if an assassin designed a robot programmed to kill anything that moved, and put it in position to take out his target, would the robot be responsible if it killed the target? Wouldn't the one who built the robot be responsible?

I don't think that Adam and Eve were programmed to sin. As you mentioned, I think they had the capacity to do so, but chose to sin.

In that respect they are responsible for their actions.

Since the fall things get a bit more complicated, due to sin now being in the world, and that gets into a whole other discussion of the nature of the fall, and post-fall anthropology.

But if Adam and Eve had a choice, then that means that God can still be sovereign,, yet allow for choice within the parameters He set.

If Adam and Eve had no choice, how are they any different than the robot? How can they have responsibility?

Be wary of trickery that Calvinists typically engage in, such as defining "choice" not as a voluntary action but "selecting what you desire". Calvinism teaches that everything, including the fall, was God's intentional design to bring glory to Himself by "delivering" a lucky few from the horrors He designed for the unelect to endure based solely on His eternal design. When presented with verses like 2 Peter 3:9 and 1 Timothy 2:4 they suddenly attribute God two wills, thereby commanding what He would not have.

 

[Hentenza]

Be wary of trickery that Calvinists typically engage in, such as defining "choice" not as a voluntary action but "selecting what you desire". Calvinism teaches that everything, including the fall, was God's intentional design to bring glory to Himself by "delivering" a lucky few from the horrors He designed for the unelect to endure based solely on His eternal design. When presented with verses like 2 Peter 3:9 and 1 Timothy 2:4 they suddenly attribute God two wills, thereby commanding what He would not have.

But God is omniscient so He knows all from beginning to end. I do agree that foreknowledge is not the same as determination but that does not reduce His omniscience.

 

[Fervent]

But God is omniscient so He knows all from beginning to end. I do agree that foreknowledge is not the same as determination but that does not reduce His omniscience.

Certainly not, the issue isn't whether God knows all but whether God is meticulously determining everything that has ever or will ever come to pass. And a lot of the conflict is because too many people try to resolve the tension by falling on one side or the other. God is sovereign, and man is free. In His infinite wisdom, He designed it in such a way that it will resolve itself without His meticulous control. Calvinism is built on a fear that if we don't understand how that can be, then we cannot trust that it is so.

 

[Hentenza]

Certainly not, the issue isn't whether God knows all but whether God is meticulously determining everything that has ever or will ever come to pass. And a lot of the conflict is because too many people try to resolve the tension by falling on one side or the other. God is sovereign, and man is free. In His infinite wisdom, He designed it in such a way that it will resolve itself without His meticulous control. Calvinism is built on a fear that if we don't understand how that can be, then we cannot trust that it is so.

I think Arminianism logically leads to open theism so that’s out for me. Calvinism is intriguing but it is an attempt to explain God which falls under “my ways are my ways, not yours“ biblical certainty. I think the tension is unexplainable in this world. However, the Bible teaches both predestination and free will. I think that somehow God allows for both. In my mission trips I’ve seen many come to the Lord on their own not even by the preaching we did. That has been intriguing because how did they know? Somehow God makes it happen.

 

[Fervent]

I think Arminianism logically leads to open theism so that’s out for me. Calvinism is intriguing but it is an attempt to explain God which falls under “my ways are my ways, not yours“ biblical certainty. I think the tension is unexplainable in this world. However, the Bible teaches both predestination and free will. I think that somehow God allows for both. In my mission trips I’ve seen many come to the Lord on their own not even by the preaching we did. That has been intriguing because how did they know? Somehow God makes it happen.

Who said anything about Arminianism? I agree, the tension isn't explainable. God calls us to trust Him, which is good enough for me. I don't need a fully worked out theology, but I do feel a need to oppose philosophical systems in theological dressing that defame God's character which is how I see Calvinism.

 

[Hentenza]

Who said anything about Arminianism?

Because people seem to think that there are only two soteriology views. I call it two heads on a three headed coin.

I agree, the tension isn't explainable. God calls us to trust Him, which is good enough for me. I don't need a fully worked out theology, but I do feel a need to oppose philosophical systems in theological dressing that defame God's character which is how I see Calvinism.

So how do you explain the predestination taught in scripture? You can’t just hate a position so much to loose objectivity. I think we both fundamentally agree but since the tension cannot be resolved in this life then logically you cannot discount either position fully.

 

[Fervent]

Because people seem to think that there are only two soteriology views. I call it two heads on a three headed coin.

If you only read Protestant theology, maybe.

So how do you explain the predestination taught in scripture?

Corporately, not particularly. And where particular, in Christ.

You can’t just hate a position so much to loose objectivity.

Sure, but my contentions about the position only find assertions as counters. Calvinism turns God into the author of sin, not only designing it but glorying in it.

I think we both fundamentally agree but since the tension cannot be resolved in this life then logically you cannot discount either position fully.

I'm not sure that's true, exactly. Though my view of free will is that we know it from exercising it. I believe in it because I make decisions, so whatever is true it must at the very least accomodate that belief. Whereas deterministic philosophical systems involve long chains of reasoning which may or may not be built on flawed premises. So to me, whatever understanding of God's sovereignty I come to it must line up with my basic experience which inclines me to believe in free will almost as strongly as I believe that I exist.

 

[Hentenza]

If you only read Protestant theology, maybe.

Corporately, not particularly. And where particular, in Christ.

Sure, but my contentions about the position only find assertions as counters. Calvinism turns God into the author of sin, not only designing it but glorying in it.

I'm not sure that's true, exactly. Though my view of free will is that we know it from exercising it. I believe in it because I make decisions, so whatever is true it must at the very least accomodate that belief. Whereas deterministic philosophical systems involve long chains of reasoning which may or may not be built on flawed premises. So to me, whatever understanding of God's sovereignty I come to it must line up with my basic experience which inclines me to believe in free will almost as strongly as I believe that I exist.

I understand. I grew up Catholic so I understand your limitations.

BTW- do you deny that God knows all of your decisions even before you make them?

 

[Fervent]

I understand. I grew up Catholic so I understand your limitations.

I am not Catholic, I just prefer to expose myself to a wide set of theological opinions. The dichotomy between Calvinism and Arminianism is a distinctly Protestant thing, typically the debate in more traditional churches is between Thomism and Molinism.

BTW- do you deny that God knows all of your decisions even before you make them?

I don't think categories like "before" apply to God.

 

[Hentenza]

I am not Catholic, I just prefer to expose myself to a wide set of theological opinions. The dichotomy between Calvinism and Arminianism is a distinctly Protestant thing, typically the debate in more traditional churches is between Thomism and Molinism.

I’m unapologetically Protestant so I’ve been open to many theological opinions for years. You just talked like a Catholic though. lol

I don't think categories like "before" apply to God.

See we agree.

 

[Fervent]

I’m unapologetically Protestant so I’ve been open to many theological opinions for years. You just talked like a Catholic though. lol

I put a premium on the consensus patrum, so a lot of my theological opinions line up with Catholics and Orthodox. Only really disagree with their ecclesiology.

See we agree.

Well, that's worth celebrating.

 

[Hentenza]

I put a premium on the consensus patrum, so a lot of my theological opinions line up with Catholics and Orthodox. Only really disagree with their ecclesiology.

That makes sense. I look forward to gently disagreeing with you.

Well, that's worth celebrating.

Yay!!!