Calvinism, explained.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
One hardly knows where to start with correcting you people.

Your refusal to recognize the doctrines of “permissive will” and “perfect will” is almost beyond belief.

I’ve always said that people who deny basic Reformed doctrine almost have to be reading a different Bible than the one I have read and studied all these years.

It would appear that you folks have never read the book of Job or even much of the Bible at all for that matter.

The vilest sins of men and angels in the history of the world have all been permitted by God to take place for His ultimate glory. Of all of the sins in this world - one prime example should suffice.

I doubt very much though that it will stop anyone from saying more of the silly things being said here. It’s absolutely amazing what people will do to argue in any way they can against so called “Calvinism”.

“It was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.” Isaiah 53:10

“Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above…” John 19:11

Let me paraphrase that for you so that you don’t miss it.

“You would not have the ability to commit this horrible sin if it were not the will of God that it be allowed to take place at your hand.”

I can almost hear the weak silly arguments coming. But they will be just that – weak and silly arguments.

You have to be willing to rewrite the entire Bible in order to deny the concepts of the permissive and perfect wills of God.

It’s all being said in the name of undermining a doctrine dear to Calvinists – and that in spite of the fact that it a doctrine accepted by every reputable theologian from outside the Calvinist camp as well.

It’s amazing to see what is being said here. It would be funny – if it were not so sad.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Should have paid more attention to this little gem.
Yes you should have. Understanding the points I made would have gone a long way toward keeping you from making some of the mistakes you have made regarding the permissive will of God supposedly not existing.
..........Using parts of the Word of God to chastise me. Why are you using scripture or a form of against a fellow believer? Is that how you weild God's sword of the truth in His Word? Against fellow believers in a public forum making unfounded and disgusting claims against their character?
Now you're reverting to playing the wounded little lady again. Amazing.:sigh:

My statements were based on the facts which you have displayed here.

You alternate between the little wounded fawn image and that of an insulting, condescending, ranting, fire breathing dragon as it suits you.

The trouble is that you have displayed this transformation for over 5 months now on this thread and people are on to you.

I point out the obvious and I'm now supposed to be unspiritual for doing it. I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nobdysfool
Upvote 0

nobdysfool

The original! Accept no substitutes!
Feb 23, 2003
15,018
1,006
Home, except when I'm not....
✟21,146.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
And that has been my issue. Reconciling a perfect, holy God with two different wills and with one of those wills condoning sin, or actually willing sin into existence. This is actually a fairly gnostic principle that says that God used satan temporarily to bring about sin, through His will. But then why would satan and his angels be already determined to reside in the Lake of Fire for eternity? Which one could then say if God willingly, predetermined sin than He willingly predetermined His Son's death and suffering.

If this were true, then the Bible is not perfect.

Also, if God is perfect, and only righteous than He could not have two wills that conflict.


"(Act 2:23) this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men."

God DID willingly predetermine His Son's Death and Suffering.

You say that if that is so, then the Bible's not perfect.

Wanna revise (and reverse) that statement now?
.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sdowney717
Upvote 0

sdowney717

Newbie
Apr 20, 2013
8,712
2,021
✟102,588.00
Faith
Christian
"(Act 2:23) this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men."

God DID willingly predetermined His Son's Death and Suffering.

You say that if that is so, then the Bible's not perfect.

Wanna revise (and reverse) that statement now?
.
I wonder if this will even be recognized. So many times we post scriptures and it is just plain old ignored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nobdysfool
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
"(Act 2:23) this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men."

God DID willingly predetermined His Son's Death and Suffering.

You say that if that is so, then the Bible's not perfect.

Wanna revise (and reverse) that statement now?
.
I have told them that I am amazed that they deny the doctrine of the permissive will of God.

I wasn't just using hyperbole when I said that I'm amazed by it. I really find it very hard to believe what they are saying.

If God hasn't been "permitting" all of this pain, death, and destruction that we've observed happening in His creation for the last few thousand years - how on earth is it happening?:scratch:

As I said once before, a person hardly knows where to start with critiquing such a position.

I can only figure that their hatred of Calvinism has so blinded them to truth that they even reject a common doctrine simply because the Calvinists are included in the list of those believing it.

Truly the truth of the Lord's statement that "even what he thinks he has will be taken away" from those who do not have ears to hear is being displayed here for all to see.

This is an amazing development even for this controversial thread.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

EmSw

White Horse Rider
Apr 26, 2014
6,434
718
✟66,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I have told them that I am amazed that they deny the doctrine of the permissive will of God.

I wasn't just using hyperbole when I said that I'm amazed by it. I really find it very hard to believe what they are saying.

If God hasn't been "permitting" all of this pain, death, and destruction that we've observed happening in His creation for the last few thousand years - how on earth is it happening?:scratch:

As I said once before, a person hardly knows where to start with critiquing such a position.

I can only figure that their hatred of Calvinism has so blinded them to truth that they even reject a common doctrine simply because the Calvinists are included in the list of those believing it.

Truly the truth of the Lord's statement that "even what he thinks he has will be taken away" from those who do not have ears to hear is being displayed here for all to see.

This is an amazing development even for this controversial thread.

"The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, blind, deaf, silly, slow, hateful of my doctrine, unbelieving, and have no understanding. I critique and correct them to no avail. I have understanding, I see, and my friends all agree with me."

"Jesus replied, for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased. Then Jesus said, for judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind."
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
"The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, blind, deaf, silly, slow, hateful of my doctrine, unbelieving, and have no understanding. I critique and correct them to no avail. I have understanding, I see, and my friends all agree with me."

"Jesus replied, for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased. Then Jesus said, for judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind."
" .. the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires" 2 timothy 4:3

One of the most well documented and universally accepted doctrines in all of Christianity has been the doctrine of the permissive and perfect wills of God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nobdysfool
Upvote 0

EmSw

White Horse Rider
Apr 26, 2014
6,434
718
✟66,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
" .. the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires" 2 timothy 4:3

One of the most well documented and universally accepted doctrines in all of Christianity has been the doctrine of the permissive and perfect wills of God.

A double-minded God is not sound doctrine!
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I can only figure that their hatred of Calvinism has so blinded them to truth that they even reject a common doctrine simply because the Calvinists are included in the list of those believing it.
Oh yes, we do waste our time talking with other Christians about Biblical doctrine because we 'hate' them. How silly.

Then we would have to repent for our bad feelings and ask for forgiveness. And so the circle would go.

Why do you use such a strong word as hate?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I have told them that I am amazed that they deny the doctrine of the permissive will of God.

I wasn't just using hyperbole when I said that I'm amazed by it. I really find it very hard to believe what they are saying.

If God hasn't been "permitting" all of this pain, death, and destruction that we've observed happening in His creation for the last few thousand years - how on earth is it happening?:scratch:

That is why God is not predetermining all through His will. God 'permitting' all of these things comes down to free-choice. That God gives man free-choice as He did in the Garden. God does not will sin.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Why do you use such a strong word as hate?
You have made it clear from the start that you hate the teachings of the Calvinists.

I'm I wrong about that?
That is why God is not predetermining all through His will. God 'permitting' all of these things comes down to free-choice. That God gives man free-choice as He did in the Garden. God does not will sin.
A hard line Calvinist would likely immediately challenge what you mean by "free choice". But I won't. Let's just let that term go for now.

Without getting too far into the muddy waters of the fact that God is omnipresent and that we "have our being in Him" - God "permitting" sins to take place through the will of the creature is exactly what is believed by Calvinists - just as it is by you.

Any reference to robotics and puppetry and the like, as you will remember from elsewhere in this thread, only comes from non-Calvinist rhetoric and never from the lips of Calvinists. To the contrary, there are pages of protests from Calvinists about the idea that predestination requires any kind of hard manipulative determinism in order for something predestined to actually take place.

You seem to be hung up on the word "will" - as if that particular word made God the author of evil.

We (and related confessions such as the WCF) have always made it clear that we do not believe that to be the case and we are certainly not teaching it.

It seems to me that antagonists to Calvinism have spouted the "free will" mantra so often and for so long that, any time the word "will" is used, they immediately flash to that mantra rather than just dialog in the way that the word is now being used.

For instance - if I say that I am now willing that you be able to post a reply to me - that is not the same things as me authoring that reply. That would be true even if I somehow absolutely knew what you would post and permitted it anyway.

I would be willing that the post take place just as you yourself freely will to author it. My knowing what would be in the post and still willing it to take place is not the same thing as saying that I am authoring the post or even that I like what I know will be the content. I may well hate it.

I can absolutely detest what I know you will write and still be righteous in my willingness that you write it.

I know, I know - no illustration is perfect.

LOOK - Do you agree that, if we say that God decided before a sin took place to let that sin take place, that is not the same thing as saying that He committed the sin Himself?

If so - then any red herrings related to the concept of hard, coercive determinism is invalid.

If so - then there should be no reason to object to saying that God willed to permit sin to happen. That is exactly what the doctrine of permissive will says. It does not say and has never said that He loves the sin. In fact the doctrine affirms that He hate the sin. The WCF, as an example of Calvinist doctrine, goes out of it's way to make that point crystal clear.

The "permissive will of God" is a term that is used by Calvinists, Arminians, and virtually all of the Christian world.

That is why I say that anyone objecting to this, pretty much universally held doctrine of the permissive will of God, is doing so as a visceral reaction to the fact that it is foundational to the beliefs of those dreaded Calvinists.

The fact that God permits sin to take place (it is in His "permissive will" that it take pace) is a fact that must be faced by all Bible believers - Calvinists included.

As I said way back in a previous post - the difference in the view of Reformed and non-Reformed theologians concerns whether God planned all along to allow it and somehow use it for His glory in the end.The Reformed theologian would say that that is absolutely the case.

The non-Reformed would deny that that is the case. They would, instead say in effect that God had no plans from before the foundation of the world to permit sin to happen for His ultimate glory. They would, instead, say that the only reason that He is allowing sin is because He values the so called free will of the creature above all else - that that is the diving factor in His decision to "permit" win to take place.

The Reformed theologian would say, instead of the above, that God values His own glory above all else. Anything that He does through His Word is for His glory.

You may still be tempted to see all of this in the light of robotics, puppetry, and automation.

If that is the case - then I can and will explain how the predestination of all that takes place in God's creation does in no way preclude the "free will" choices of the creation.

If you choose to not receive further from me for some reason then I will conclude that, as I charged before, you are not interested in knowing how and why Reformed theologians think the way they do.

If you are not willing to learn from another, but only spout typical anti-Calvinist rhetoric, then you are on your own. Believe what you will.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nobdysfool
Upvote 0

EmSw

White Horse Rider
Apr 26, 2014
6,434
718
✟66,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You have made it clear from the start that you hate the teachings of the Calvinists.

I'm I wrong about that?

A hard line Calvinist would likely immediately challenge what you mean by "free choice". But I won't. Let's just let that term go for now.

Without getting too far into the muddy waters of the fact that God is omnipresent and that we "have our being in Him" - God "permitting" sins to take place through the will of the creature is exactly what is believed by Calvinists - just as it is by you.

Any reference to robotics and puppetry and the like, as you will remember from elsewhere in this thread, only comes from non-Calvinist rhetoric and never from the lips of Calvinists. To the contrary, there are pages of protests from Calvinists about the idea that predestination requires any kind of hard manipulative determinism in order for something predestined to actually take place.

You seem to be hung up on the word "will" - as if that particular word made God the author of evil.

We (and related confessions such as the WCF) have always made it clear that we do not believe that to be the case and we are certainly not teaching it.

It seems to me that antagonists to Calvinism have spouted the "free will" mantra so often and for so long that, any time the word "will" is used, they immediately flash to that mantra rather than just dialog in the way that the word is now being used.

For instance - if I say that I am now willing that you be able to post a reply to me - that is not the same things as me authoring that reply. That would be true even if I somehow absolutely knew what you would post and permitted it anyway.

I would be willing that the post take place just as you yourself freely will to author it. My knowing what would be in the post and still willing it to take place is not the same thing as saying that I am authoring the post or even that I like what I know will be the content. I may well hate it.

I can absolutely detest what I know you will write and still be righteous in my willingness that you write it.

I know, I know - no illustration is perfect.

LOOK - Do you agree that, if we say that God decided before a sin took place to let that sin take place, that is not the same thing as saying that He committed the sin Himself?

If so - then any red herrings related to the concept of hard, coercive determinism is invalid.

If so - then there should be no reason to object to saying that God willed to permit sin to happen. That is exactly what the doctrine of permissive will says. It does not say and has never said that He loves the sin. In fact the doctrine affirms that He hate the sin. The WCF, as an example of Calvinist doctrine, goes out of it's way to make that point crystal clear.

The "permissive will of God" is a term that is used by Calvinists, Arminians, and virtually all of the Christian world.

That is why I say that anyone objecting to this, pretty much universally held doctrine of the permissive will of God, is doing so as a visceral reaction to the fact that it is foundational to the beliefs of those dreaded Calvinists.

The fact that God permits sin to take place (it is in His "permissive will" that it take pace) is a fact that must be faced by all Bible believers - Calvinists included.

As I said way back in a previous post - the difference in the view of Reformed and non-Reformed theologians concerns whether God planned all along to allow it and somehow use it for His glory in the end.The Reformed theologian would say that that is absolutely the case.

The non-Reformed would deny that that is the case. They would, instead say in effect that God had no plans from before the foundation of the world to permit sin to happen for His ultimate glory. They would, instead, say that the only reason that He is allowing sin is because He values the so called free will of the creature above all else - that that is the diving factor in His decision to "permit" win to take place.

The Reformed theologian would say, instead of the above, that God values His own glory above all else. Anything that He does through His Word is for His glory.

You may still be tempted to see all of this in the light of robotics, puppetry, and automation.

If that is the case - then I can and will explain how the predestination of all that takes place in God's creation does in no way preclude the "free will" choices of the creation.

If you choose to not receive further from me for some reason then I will conclude that, as I charged before, you are not interested in knowing how and why Reformed theologians think the way they do.

If you are not willing to learn from another, but only spout typical anti-Calvinist rhetoric, then you are on your own. Believe what you will.

Without knowing what the will is, man comes up with all kind of wild ideas about it.

John Piper wrote, 'Affirming the will of God to save all, while also affirming the unconditional election of some, implies that there are at least "two wills" in God, or two ways of willing. It implies that God decrees one state of affairs while also willing and teaching that a different state of affairs should come to pass. This distinction in the way God wills has been expressed in various ways throughout the centuries. It is not a new contrivance. For example, theologians have spoken of sovereign will and moral will, efficient will and permissive will, secret will and revealed will, will of decree and will of command, decretive will and preceptive will, voluntas signi (will of sign) and voluntas beneplaciti (will of good pleasure), etc.'
http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/are-there-two-wills-in-god

With so many wills, God must be a confused being. What will does He use doing this, what will does He use doing that? With such wild diversity, it's no wonder man doesn't know Who God is. Man can only come up with guesses Who God is, because God is all over the place.

With so many wills, we also see God as uncertain in His ways. Many of His wills contradict each other, making God a liar, and leaves man in the dark. With so much confusion, man has to choose which will God means in every action of His, thus man can believe what he wants about God's wills. Even if the Bible says one thing, man can attribute another interpretation to one of His alternate wills.

What is the will? If a person doesn't know, his natural thinking will lead him down many roads trying to explain it.

The will pertains to love, and is the 'mechanism' by which man chooses. What a man loves, that he wills, and what he wills, that he loves. If a man loves evil, his will chooses evil; if a man loves good, his will chooses good.

Since man has many loves (good and evil), it may seem as if he has a will for each action and behavior. However, man has only one will with many loves. Thus the will is able to choose good, while at the same time choose evil.

When the Bible speaks of any behavior, it is man's love which enables the will to either obey it or ignore it. If man loves adultery in any form, his will chooses that behavior, whether he hides it, declares it, permits it, or reveals it.

A man who says he loves his neighbor, but yet secretly hates him, is a hypocrite. His will is not to love his neighbor as himself, but to love his neighbor only as it benefits him. Since man can hide this secretive part of his will, he is able to fool man, but, God searches the heart and is the only One Who knows man's one true will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToBeLoved
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
"(Act 2:23) this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men."

God DID willingly predetermine His Son's Death and Suffering.

You say that if that is so, then the Bible's not perfect.

Wanna revise (and reverse) that statement now?
.
That doesn't mean that God predetermined sin. That doesn't mean that sin is part of God's will.

The only thing this verse is talking about is Jesus' crucifiction, however that is not a sin, since it saved the world.

Adam & Eve however is a different story. Why would God use satan to do His will if it is His will that sin come into the world? Why didn't God just make the tree 'irresistable' and guide them too it, if they had no free will.

It just doesn't make sense.

Under your theory, God desired and willed satan into rebellion,but not Michael or Gabriel. smh :scratch: Then willed Adam & Eve into sin through satan. Kicked satan out of heaven for being re4bellious against God, when it was God's will in the first place to have him rebel. :scratch:

Under Calvin, God created some humans for heaven and some humans for hell and it was His will to do so. But Jesus said that 'I wish ALL to come to me", so then Jesus will is different from the Father? Or Jesus was not perfect? Or ???
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
You have made it clear from the start that you hate the teachings of the Calvinists.

I'm I wrong about that?
I don't believe the teaching, nor like it. I less than like it, I totally dislike it.

But 'hate' is a foul word because it carries with it so much emotion. I don't care what a Christian believes if they are saved, however I would like them if they say God's Word is perfect to be able to explain how they reconcile their beliefs (ie Calvinism) back to God's Word being perfect.

Now what I really do not like is their sharing of the gospel and how they present Christ because the problem areas they cannot explain I feel takes away from our witness. Saying God is perfect, yet willed sin into the world is a direct contridiction of the perfection of God. So we have two different GOd's here. The perfect and holy God who cannot have, nor be reconciled to sin (hence Jesus death and victory over sin by His blood) OR a God who wills sin and then wills His Son to come save the world from the sin He willed.

So, I take it now you will not be telling me or anyone else what I feel or hate. geez
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.