God's Decree

[Hammster]

You just agreed that God's decree causes everything. Causing sin is sin. I have every scripture that says men deserve punishment for sinning.

Where did I say that God causes everything?

What would be helpful is if you addressed what I actually say instead of trying to read something into it.

 

[bcbsr]

Good Day,
If any one will dispute with God, and endeavour to evade his judgment, by pretending that he could not have done otherwise, the answer already given is sufficient, that it is owing not to creation, but the corruption of nature, that man has become the slave of sin, and can will nothing but evil that man has become the slave of sin, and can will nothing but evil

Apparently he really didn't think that through. Who created the "corrupt nature"? Is there another god out there that created the corrupt nature. Was the "corrupt nature" something you programmed yourself with? Did you, or some other creator, program yourself with a corrupt nature before or some time after you were born? And If you didn't program yourself with a corrupt nature, then how is it that God holds you accountable for what you did not have control over?

Either you have not been created by God, or God created you will a corrupt nature. Which is it?

 

[bcbsr]

Is this admitting that you can’t find anything that states God makes people do evil? Because nothing you posted states that.

I'm pointing out what Calvin implies which any rational person should be able to see.

 

[BBAS 64]

Apparently he really didn't think that through. Who created the "corrupt nature"? Is there another god out there that created the corrupt nature. Was the "corrupt nature" something you programmed yourself with? Did you, or some other creator, program yourself with a corrupt nature before or some time after you were born? And If you didn't program yourself with a corrupt nature, then how is it that God holds you accountable for what you did not have control over?

Either you have not been created by God, or God created you will a corrupt nature. Which is it?

Good Day, Bcbsr

Could be highly unlikely. What is clear is you inability to understand that which you read and draw conclusions based upon your own assumptions, no matter what has been clearly written. I do understand you may not agree, but to misrepresent what someone says that is just dishonest IMHO.

In Him,

Bill

 

[Hammster]

I'm pointing out what Calvin implies which any rational person should be able to see.

You’re pointing out what you want it to say. But it doesn’t actually say that. You’ve let your presuppositions cloud what you’ve read.

 

[renniks]

Where did I say that God causes everything?

What would be helpful is if you addressed what I actually say instead of trying to read something into it.

I said: "Is there something higher than God's decree that is the ultimate cause of everything then? What would that be?"

You said" This is pretty basic theology. But to answer your question, no, there’s nothing or no one higher than God."

Before that, you said God decrees everything. So connect the dots.

 

[BobRyan]

I would think that people who exercise rational thought should be able to clearly see through the contradictions of the implications of Calvinism. Let's see, God holds people accountable for things which He knows they don't have the ability to do seeing as from their very creation at birth he decreed that be the case. And yet Calvinists claim that God is just, holding people accountable for things over which they have no control. .

Yeah that is a good point.

When Calvinism comes across God asking this question "what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done?" Isaiah 5:4 - the answer from Calvinism is "you could have bothered to CARE enough to zap that person into being obedient".

 

[Hammster]

I said: "Is there something higher than God's decree that is the ultimate cause of everything then? What would that be?"

You said" This is pretty basic theology. But to answer your question, no, there’s nothing or no one higher than God."

Before that, you said God decrees everything. So connect the dots.

Decreeing something doesn’t mean that God makes man sin.

Example:


this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
— Acts 2:23

 

[Hammster]

Yeah that is a good point.

When Calvinism comes across God asking this question "what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done?" Isaiah 5:4 - the answer from Calvinism is "you could have bothered to CARE enough to zap that person into being obedient".

I’m not sure why you think a straw man is a good argument.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
Yeah that is a good point.

When Calvinism comes across God asking this question "what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done?" Isaiah 5:4 - the answer from Calvinism is "you could have bothered to CARE enough to zap that person into being obedient".

I’m not sure why you think a straw man is a good argument.

I am suggesting that if there is something else the 4 or 5 point Calvinist position would propose in response to God's question in Isaiah 5:4 -- they have the free will to go ahead and post it. I will gladly take their alternative to what I understand them to be saying at that point.

On the other hand - they might not feel comfortable answering the question God put in scripture in Isaiah 5:4

 

[Hammster]

BobRyan said: ↑
Yeah that is a good point.

When Calvinism comes across God asking this question "what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done?" Isaiah 5:4 - the answer from Calvinism is "you could have bothered to CARE enough to zap that person into being obedient".



I am suggesting that if there is something else the 4 or 5 point Calvinist position would propose in response to God's question in Isaiah 5:4 -- they have the free will to go ahead and post it. I will gladly take their alternative to what I understand them to be saying at that point.

On the other hand - they might not feel comfortable answering the question God put in scripture in Isaiah 5:4

Well, first off, where in Reformed Theology is “zapped” mentioned. Let’s start with that premise.

 

[BobRyan]

Well, first off, where in Reformed Theology is “zapped” mentioned. Let’s start with that premise.

ok fine - that's an arminian term. Now back to God's question in Isaiah 5:4. Calvinists have the free will to choose to post their answer to it - if they wish.

 

[renniks]

Decreeing something doesn’t mean that God makes man sin.

Example:


this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
— Acts 2:23

Lol, what do you not understand about the word: " everything" ?
Is sin not part of everything? You flip flop like a fish on land.

 

[Hammster]

ok fine - that's an arminian term. Now back to God's question in Isaiah 5:4. Calvinists have the free will to choose to post their answer to it - if they wish.

So what exactly am I answering? What do you think Reformed Theology has a problem with?

 

[Hammster]

Lol, what do you not understand about the word: " everything" ?
Is sin not part of everything? You flip flop like a fish on land.

I gave you scripture that point to God being behind the crucifixion. And God is not culpable for the sin that went into it. That the Reformed (and biblical) position.

I’m not sure what the issue is that you have with that.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
Yeah that is a good point.

When Calvinism comes across God asking this question "what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done?" Isaiah 5:4 - the answer from Calvinism is "you could have bothered to CARE enough to zap that person into being obedient".

I am suggesting that if there is something else the 4 or 5 point Calvinist position would propose in response to God's question in Isaiah 5:4 -- they have the free will to go ahead and post it. I will gladly take their alternative to what I understand them to be saying at that point.

On the other hand - they might not feel comfortable answering the question God put in scripture in Isaiah 5:4

So what exactly am I answering? What do you think Reformed Theology has a problem with?

so you are saying you do not even see a question in that text, quoted.. highlighted in red... ends with question mark...?

That's the answer?

 

[Hammster]

so you are saying you do not even see a question in that text, quoted.. highlighted in red... ends with question mark...?

That's the answer?

Why do you think that’s a problem for Reformed Theology? That’s what I’m wondering.

 

[renniks]

I gave you scripture that point to God being behind the crucifixion. And God is not culpable for the sin that went into it. That the Reformed (and biblical) position.

I’m not sure what the issue is that you have with that.

It doesn't say God is behind the crucifixion. It says he was delivered up to men. It says:" you nailed to the cross." Meaning men did the sinning.

 

[Hammster]

It doesn't say God is behind the crucifixion. It says he was delivered up to men. It says:" you nailed to the cross." Meaning men did the sinning.

this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
— Acts 2:23

God used the sinfulness of men to accomplish His decree, without causing them to sin.

 

[renniks]

this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
— Acts 2:23

First, let’s suppose, just for the sake of argument, that God did plan and render certain (as its ultimate cause but through secondary causes) the specific acts of the men who crucified Jesus. That in no way implies that every wicked act is planned and rendered certain by God.

2nd, is it necessarily the case that in order for God to have planned and rendered certain the crucifixion, God had to actually cause certain men to crucify Jesus? That’s a false assumption.
Suppose God wanted Jesus to be crucified in a particular place and at a particular time. Was his only recourse to pick certain individuals and cause them to crucify Jesus? Not at all! The triumphal entry into Jerusalem guaranteed that someone would crucify Jesus. But God did not have to inspire or manipulate or coerce any particular individuals to do it.
There are many ways around interpreting Acts 2:23 in the traditional Calvinist manner. No Church father of the first three centuries interpreted it that way (so far as I know). I wonder what Calvinists think about Church fathers like Irenaeus who clearly did not believe what Calvinists believe about God’s sovereignty. And yet he is a third generation Christian, taught the Christian faith by Polycarp, who was taught it by John — who forgot all about God’s absolute, determinative sovereignty between John and Irenaeus? Not.