How far back does Calvinistic type sovereignty go back?

[All Becomes New]

Hi, just a simple question.

Calvinists always say their tradition goes back to scripture. But can we find the same sort of God's sovereignty in any of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Hi, just a simple question.

Calvinists always say their tradition goes back to scripture. But can we find the same sort of God's sovereignty in any of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers?

Augustine is the foundation for Calvin's theology.

Augustinian Calvinism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[HTacianas]

Hi, just a simple question.

Calvinists always say their tradition goes back to scripture. But can we find the same sort of God's sovereignty in any of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers?

If by sovereignty you mean Calvin's idea of predestination you'll find a mixed bag of opinions among the Church Fathers, but nothing approaching the extreme of Calvinism. Calvinism can be traced to the bible, but only by means of the strictest, literal interpretation of some verses here and there that convey generalities rather than specifics. Far more parts of the bible refute the ideas of Calvin. For instance, if Calvinism was true, the bible would never contain the word "if".

 

[Clare73]

Hi, just a simple question.

Calvinists always say their tradition goes back to scripture. But can we find the same sort of God's sovereignty in any of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers?

The sovereignty of God goes back to Da 4:35, Ac 2:23, Ac 4:28, Ac 13:48, Lk 22:22, Ro 8:29-30, Ro 9:14-29, Ro 11:25-34, Eph 1:4-12, 2Th 2:13, 1Pe 1:2 and in at least another 15 Scriptures.

What other authority do we need?

 

[All Becomes New]

The sovereignty of God goes back to Da 4:35, Ac 2:23, Ac 4:28, Ac 13:48, Lk 22:22, Ro 8:29-30, Ro 9:14-29, Ro 11:25-34, Eph 1:4-12, 2Th 2:13, 1Pe 1:2 and in at least another 15 Scriptures.

What other authority do we need?

Every tradition of Christianity believes God is sovereign. The question is how is God sovereign that is different. In short, there are many different interpretations of God's sovereignty. That's why knowing what the ECF thought about God's sovereignty is important. Because if they saw it differently, then it shows that the Apostles likely saw it differently as well.

 

[Clare73]

The sovereignty of God goes back to Da 4:35, Ac 2:23, Ac 4:28, Ac 13:48, Lk 22:22, Ro 8:29-30, Ro 9:14-29, Ro 11:25-34, Eph 1:4-12, 2Th 2:13, 1Pe 1:2 and in at least another 15 Scriptures.

What other authority do we need?

Every tradition of Christianity believes God is sovereign. The question is how is God sovereign that is different. In short, there are many different interpretations of God's sovereignty. That's why knowing what the ECF thought about God's sovereignty is important. Because if they saw it differently, then it shows that the Apostles likely saw it differently as well.

Do you think it would differ from the Scriptures above?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Hi, just a simple question.

Calvinists always say their tradition goes back to scripture. But can we find the same sort of God's sovereignty in any of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers?

I was just now avoiding responding to someone who relies on others, (supposed "prophets" and "revelators"), for his beliefs.

The obvious truth of God's Sovereignty goes all the way back to Genesis 1:1, and is re-iterated in John 1. Scriptures are replete with it. So, why should we need anyone else to be a source for it? We are not faithful to any "tradition" for its own sake. I don't care how old the tradition is.

 

[All Becomes New]

Do you think it would differ from the Scriptures above?

I think there are things that God is absolutely sovereign over and controls meticulously. But this is not the case for everything. If fact, it never spells that our anywhere in the whole Bible. It gives us some examples of where and when God reaches down to use and does what he wills. But this is not the case for everything and it can't be demonstrated for everything from the Bible.

 

[All Becomes New]

I was just now avoiding responding to someone who relies on others, (supposed "prophets" and "revelators"), for his beliefs.

Excuse me?

 

[Mark Quayle]

I think there are things that God is absolutely sovereign over and controls meticulously. But this is not the case for everything. If fact, it never spells that our anywhere in the whole Bible. It gives us some examples of where and when God reaches down to use and does what he wills. But this is not the case for everything and it can't be demonstrated for everything from the Bible.

Can you see that logically then, the things he "[does not] control meticulously", must come about by causes from outside God?

But if God is 'first cause' (which is necessarily 'Omnipotence'), then logically all that comes subsequently descends via causation from him. He causes every detail.

But if you need Bible for it, John 1:3 says all things were made by him.

 

[All Becomes New]

Can you see that logically then, the things he "[does not] control meticulously", must come about by causes from outside God?

But if God is 'first cause' (which is necessarily 'Omnipotence'), then logically all that comes subsequently descends via causation from him. He causes every detail.

But if you need Bible for it, John 1:3 says all things were made by him.

The laws of physics are always subservient to God, but that does not mean that God actively controls the laws of physics all the time.

Now let me ask you something. Is the movement that is going on in Asbury something that God has done?

 

[Mark Quayle]

The laws of physics are always subservient to God, but that does not mean that God actively controls the laws of physics all the time.

Now let me ask you something. Is the movement that is going on in Asbury something that God has done?

Once again, why only go part way? Why not ask if the mangled distortions of humanity, or the rape of a child, is "something that God has done"?

Are you hoping for an answer like those who had hoped to trap Jesus, to whom Jesus replied, "John’s baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or of human origin?” They discussed it among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will ask, ‘Then why didn’t you believe him?’"? I'm not as clever as Jesus, so I can't say, "Neither do I answer your question."

Actually, I guess I could plead ignorance of the "movement that is going on in Asbury", but I can guess and I can look it up. But the answer will be the same: Whatever happens is by God's design, whether it is your next breath, or me making my coffee stronger than I had meant to, or even whether it is every detail of Hitler's atrocities. But if you take that to mean that I think God condones what is going on in Asbury, I don't mean that, nor do I mean that he does not condone it.

If, as I believe, everything but first cause (God) is an effect, though most effects are also causes —in other words, that the law of causation is absolutely pervasive— then, logically, first cause (God) has caused all things to come to pass.

And yes, that means down to the smallest part of the smallest particle of matter and energy, and what it does. "In him we live and move and have our being." But if you discard the law of causation as inapplicable in even one case, then you invoke the authority of chance, which is self-contradictory.