There are several arguments used by Calvinists to reconcile the sovereignty of God, and the free will of man, which were not discussed in this thread. I determined at the onset that I would only deal with such arguments that were presented by Calvinists in this thread directly..
Good - now you need to honestly deal with what has been presented to you in the thread. Please do not fall back on your tendency to make statements which misrepresent what others believe.
After having studied Reformed Theology for decades, (and being neither a Calvinist, Arminian, or Molinist), I have yet to encounter a Calvinist that can answer the question presented by the OP.
I find it extremely easy to do so and I have done so several times now.
I find it a crying shame that you have spent so many decades trying to undermine what is obviously a scripturally accurate proposition in the WCF. You obviously have all of the intellectual tools to arrive at the truth. But it seems to me that your bias against Calvinism has blinded your eyes and hamstrung what should be a meaningful study of the subject.
After this post – I do not intend to engage you again on this. Your reaction to my difficult arguments is to misrepresent what I believe. A simple example is your purposeful use of term ordained Adam "
TO SIN" done IMO to leave the impression that Calvinists teach that God forced or coerced Adam to sin- when they say quite clearly that they do not believe or teach that.
You basic beef with the statements in the WCF is that they say the following:
Chapter III Of God's Eternal Decree “God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.”
You say that the two statements concerning His decree and the free will of men are contradictory and irreconcilable. As a result you reject them and, not only that, you spend your time arguing against those who disagree with you.
I, on the other hand, see both truths in the scriptures and am honor bound as a good theologian to state them both. Any lack of understanding of how they can both be true has nothing to do with it. God’s ways are not our ways and even those things I don’t fully understand must therefore be presented to God’s people. (Actually – I have no such inability to understand them – but if I did – I would still teach them as God’s Word on the subject).
The WCF uses the word “decree” simply because that was a common and accurate word at the time for what the scriptures say God’s relation to His creation consists of – namely His proclaimed Word carrying out what He wants done. We are, by the way, critiquing the appropriateness of the word decree as
they obviously meant it and not necessarily in the way moderns use it, including perhaps Webster (although I don't believe there is any conflict there). For that matter - we aren't even talking about how decree is used elsewhere in the scriptures. We are talking about the concept as the writers of the WCF viewed the word decree and how and why they used it.
By the way again - no one thinks for a minute that the decrees of God consist of some literal blowing of a trumpet or the posting of written notices on walls or bellowing something out in a loud voice or any other such thing.. The concept of decrees is simply a way of illustrating what God does with His "sent forth" sovereign Word.
Concerning the act of creation, the scripture says, “…my Word that goes forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” Isaiah 55:11
That’s exactly like a decree by a sovereign power such as an earthly king – the sending forth of his word to have certain things happen. Calling it a decree is a completely accurate representation of what the scripture teaches as well as what the writers of the WCF statement were trying to convey.
But it doesn’t stop there when it comes to the revelation by the Holy Spirit concerning the relationship of God’s decree to His creation.
Speaking of God’s Word, it says, “…by Him
all things were created,
both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things,
and in Him all things consist.” Colossians 1:15-17
Further, it says, “...in Him
we live and move and exist…” Acts 17:28
So God’s decree touches on every single aspect of His creation – from the creation being brought into being “ex nihilo” by the simple command of God to God’s continued providential involvement in the existence and functioning of everything in the creation.
When it says “all things” it means exactly that. It includes His omnipresent upholding of the the sun, the moon, the stars, the earth the garden, the serpent, Lucifer, Adam, Eve and the fruit on the tree , God’s decree even concerns Adam’s brain (and yours as well) and the chemicals where with our thought processes are carried out. They all (“everything” - including the things done by Adam including his reaching hand and his fruit eating mouth) have their being in the decree of God which He sent forth.
The compilers of the WCF didn’t have the luxury you seem to think you have to ignore the entire council of God on a matter and pick and choose what they wanted to consider when coming up with simple, accurate, and comprehensive statements with which to teach these difficult doctrines to Christ’s church.
You may not like it and you may not be able to reconcile it to your satisfaction. But the fact is God sent forth His Word and He kept His Word working in every conceivable minute way within His creation and thereby
decreed “everything that comes to pass”. Further, the WCF also says – He “does uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least, by his most wise and holy providence, according to his infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of his own will”.
God says it and the WCF simply teaches it.
But they were faced with a dilemma just as you and I as theologians are. Had they simple stated those facts as they stood - it might have left the impression that the statements make God the author of sin – something that the scriptures are clear is absolutely not the case. The responsibility of sin rests fully and rightfully on the head of the sinner and his unhindered free will choices and God did not "author" that sin nor does He coerce in any way His creation to make them so sin.
So they- quite wisely – place the statements concerning the, unhindered by God, free will of men and angels in the next breath of the confession. They did that so that there could be no
honest statement by anyone that they were teaching that God coerces or causes sin - or "does violence to the will of the creature" even as He decrees that everything that occurs in creation will take place.
Note that I said “
honest” statement by anyone that the WCF (and Calvinists if you please) teach that God does those things that would make Him culpable in sin.
AND STILL – men say or infer or insinuate exactly that. Quite amazing really – especially for supposedly trained theologians, born again Christians and ordained pastors.
The fact is that these particular statements in the WCF are absolutely accurate representations of what God’s Word teaches us.
No one needs to “reconcile” what God has clearly taught us. What they need to do is believe it.
What the WCF gives us in compact form are clear statements concerning the relationship of the sovereignty of God and the free will of men.
If someone doesn’t like the doctrines then they need to take it up with the God Who taught them to us. They don’t need take their displeasure with the doctrine or their inability to understand it out on Calvinists or anyone else.
I have often invited you and any other anti-WCF person to come up with better short pithy and yet comprehensive statement concerning these two truths juxtaposition with one another.
I’ve yet to see one from anyone, least of all by you. The reason, I believe, is clear. I have also stipulated that the statement not touch on
only one of the doctrines but cover both just as the WCF did with theirs.
It’s not enough to simply burp out some inane statement that mentions the holiness of God and the free will of men and lets it go at that - thinking that thy have covered the subject as needed.
Go big or stay home, as they say. Cover the entire subject matter from what God tells us about His Word in relation to His creation as well as the free will of men or don't present an opinion at all. We don't get to pick and choose which scriptures we'll let shed light on our doctrine.
By the way – I probably don’t understand God’s working in these matters a whole lot better than most. I don’t understand how I can have my existence upheld by His Word including my brain and not just be a puppet or a robot or something as the old often used straw man goes.
I don’t know how someone who is created by His Word and upheld by His Word and is working out my salvation through His Word – can really be loved by Him in any meaningful manner as we would our own wives or husbands or children. But He clearly does. He hovers over us and sings to us constantly and He suffered and died for us.
Mine is but to believe it all (and not pick and choose) as I like or can fully understand).
But- as with these accurate and comprehensive statements found in the WCF – I don’t have to understand it all fully. What I need to do is believe it all and rejoice in such a mysterious, powerful, inscrutable and yet highly personal God.
I’m ignoring you now. It's kind of a shame really. You could have learned something new that you hadn't thought of before - even after all your years of study and patting yourself on your back.
Not being a party line Calvinist - I can and would explain things in ways you likely have not considered. But you've pretty much shut that avenue off with you misrepresentations of what I and Calvinists believe and teach.
If you want to continue to misrepresent what I believe or muddy the water of the OP by branching off into other areas of so called Calvinism – that will be between you and the Lord. Judging by your side comments so far about other areas of Calvinist doctrine - you really have a general mind blockage concerning any truth that they may have right – simply because there are some other areas of Calvinism that chaff you.
If someone reads what I have written and catches you doing what you have done in the past - they can call you on it and hopefully they will. Perhaps they will be able to do it without amassing warnings. But after taking you to task dozens of times for misrepresenting things I believe or teach, only to have you continue to do so – I have run out of patience.
I'm thinking that without me you'll pretty much see your thread shrivel and die on the vine. But then, come to think of it, you might have a lot of fun without me while impressing yourself and the few others who, like you, haven't given adequate thought to the subject at hand.
I’m pretty sure that there will others who will mindlessly “like” your posts or call what you do a “winner”.
So be it at this stage.
It’s been my experience in this forum that a lot of people have opinions about things they really haven’t thought completely through on their own in a systematic study of the entirety of the scriptures - you for sure.
