• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Virginia Tech and Calvinism

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟94,926.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
The verse says:
But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
God can't be the cause of the little ones who believe in him to sin.
What do you mean by decree?
How could there be choice when something is decreed?
That would be same as saying the robot chose to go right and not left.

all men are born slaves of sin , they have a built in preference towards sin. GOD IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THINGS IN A VARIETY OF WAYS . Pontius Pilate assumed he had autonomy , Christ told him otherwise!
 
Upvote 0

UMP

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2004
5,022
116
✟5,772.00
Faith
Christian
I have to disagree with you on what sovereign mean. The bible says God can't do a lot of things for example God can't sin, God can't lie. How could God be sovereign and not be able to lie?

Because there is no goodness in sin. There is no positive value in sin itself. Sin is a negative, it takes away, it destroys, it is evil. Therefore, not being able to do something which is evil in and of itself does not equate to less sovereignty. For example, true freedom consists in NOT being able to sin at all.
 
Upvote 0

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟94,926.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Does God cause the little ones that believe in him to sin?
If not then how is God the cause of all things?
clearly by permission........ if something is permitted , consent is used.


UMP
To decree someone to sin is evil therefore believing God doesn't decree evil doesn't make that person denying sovereignty of God.
not if you are above Law , and have pure motives and perfect wisdom ... etc etc etc.

was Judas part of God's plan ....... of course!
 
Upvote 0

orthedoxy

Lusavorchagan
Dec 15, 2003
533
17
pasadena california
✟764.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
clearly by permission........ if something is permitted , consent is used.
So God is saying whoever causes child melestation should be put to death and then he says I cause child melestation?

not if you are above Law , and have pure motives and perfect wisdom ... etc etc etc.

was Judas part of God's plan ....... of course!

How could God show love if he is above the law? If the defenition of love and hate different to God then how can you say he is a loving God?
What if Hitler loved his family would you say he is a good person?
Regarding Judas it is a heresy to believe Judas couldn't have done other then what he did or he didn't have freedom of choice.
 
Upvote 0

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟94,926.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
So God is saying whoever causes child melestation should be put to death and then he says I cause child melestation?

not in the way you think!



How could God show love if he is above the law?

:scratch:


If the defenition of love and hate different to God then how can you say he is a loving God?

because there are parellels


What if Hitler loved his family would you say he is a good person?

no!
only God is good!


Regarding Judas it is a heresy to believe Judas couldn't have done other then what he did or he didn't have freedom of choice.


that is your view , my view is that it is heresy to say otherwise!
 
Upvote 0

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟94,926.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
We turn now to ponder,

3. How is it possible for God to DECREE that men SHOULD commit certain sins, hold them RESPONSIBLE in the committal of them, and adjudge them GUILTY because they committed them?
Let us now consider the extreme case of Judas. We hold that it is clear from Scripture that God decreed from all eternity that Judas should betray the Lord Jesus. If anyone should challenge this statement we refer him to the prophecy of Zechariah through whom God declared that His Son should be sold for "thirty pieces of silver" (Zech. 11:12). As we have said in earlier pages, in prophecy God makes known what will be, and in making known what will be He is but revealing to us what He has ordained shall be. That Judas was the one through whom the prophecy of Zechariah was fulfilled needs not to be argued. But now the question we have to face is, Was Judas a responsible agent in fulfilling this decree of God? We reply that he was. Responsibility attaches mainly to the motive and intention of the one committing the act. This is recognized on every hand. Human law distinguishes between a blow inflicted by accident (without evil design) and a blow delivered with 'malice aforethought.' Apply then this same principle to the case of Judas. What was the design of his heart when he bargained with the priests? Manifestly he had no conscious desire to fulfill any decree of God, though unknown to himself he was actually doing so. On the contrary, his intention was evil only, and therefore, though God had decreed and directed his act, nevertheless his own evil intention rendered him justly guilty as he afterwards acknowledged himself-"I have betrayed innocent blood." It was the same with the Crucifixion of Christ. Scripture plainly declares that He was "delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23), and that though "the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against His Christ" yet, notwithstanding it was but "for to do whatsoever Thy hand and Thy counsel determined before to be done" (Acts 4:26, 28); which verses teach very much more than a bare permission by God, declaring, as they do, that the Crucifixion and all its details had been decreed by God. Yet, nevertheless, it was by "wicked hands," not merely "human hands" that our Lord was "crucified and slain" (Acts 2:23)."Wicked" because the intention of His crucifiers was only evil.
But it might be objected that if God decreed that Judas should betray Christ, and that the Jews and Gentiles should crucify Him they could not do otherwise, and therefore, they were not responsible for their intentions. The answer is, God had decreed that they should perform the acts they did, but in the actual perpetration of these deeds they were justly guilty because their own purposes in the doing of them was evil only. Let it be emphatically said that God does not produce the sinful dispositions of any of His creatures, though He does restrain and direct them to the accomplishing of His own purposes. Hence He is neither the Author nor the Approver of sin. This distinction was expressed thus by Augustine: "That men sin proceeds from themselves; that in sinning they perform this or that action, is from the power of God who divideth the darkness according to His pleasure." Thus it is written, "A man's heart deviseth his way: but the Lord directeth his steps" (Prov. 16:9). What we would here insist upon is, that God's decrees are not the necessitating cause of the sins of men but the fore-determined and prescribed boundings and directings of men's sinful acts. In connection with the betrayal of Christ God did not decree that He should be sold by one of His creatures and then take up a good man, instill an evil desire into his heart and thus force him to perform the terrible deed in order to execute His decree. No; not so do the Scriptures represent it. Instead, God decreed the act and selected the one who was to perform the act, but He did not make him evil in order that he should perform the deed; on the contrary, the betrayer was a "devil" at the time the Lord Jesus chose him as one of the twelve (John 6:70), and in the exercise and manifestation of his own deviltry God simply directed his actions, actions which were perfectly agreeable to his own vile heart, and performed with the most wicked intentions. Thus it was with the Crucifixion.
4. How can the sinner be held responsible to receive Christ, and be damned for rejecting Him, when God FOREORDAINED him TO condemnation?
Really, this question has been covered in what has been said under the other queries, but for the benefit of those who are exercised upon this point we give it a separate, though brief, examination. In considering the above difficulty the following points should be carefully weighed:
In the first place, no sinner, while he is in this world, knows for certain, nor can he know, that he is a "vessel of wrath fitted to destruction." This belongs to the hidden counsels of God to which he has not access. God's secret will is no business of his; God's revealed will (in the Word) is the standard of human responsibility. * And God's revealed will is plain. Each sinner is among those whom God now "commandeth to repent" (Acts 17:30). Each sinner who hears the Gospel is "commanded" to believe (1 John 3:23). And all who do truly repent and believe are saved. Therefore, is every sinner responsible to repent and believe.
In the second place, it is the duty of every sinner to search the Scriptures which "are able to make thee wise unto salvation" (2 Tim. 3:15). It is the sinner's "duty" because the Son of God has commanded him to search the Scriptures (John 5:39). If he searches them with a heart that is seeking after God then does he put himself in the way where God is accustomed to meet with sinners. Upon this point the Puritan Manton has written very helpfully.
"I cannot say to every one that ploweth, infallibly, that he shall have a good crop; but this I can say to him, It is God's use to bless the diligent and provident. I cannot say to every one that desireth posterity, Marry, and you shall have children; I cannot say infallibly to him that goeth forth to battle for his country's good that he shall have victory and success; but I can say, as Joab (1Chron. 19:13) 'Be of good courage, and let us behave ourselves valiantly for our people and the cities of our God: and let the LORD do that which is good in His sight.' I cannot say infallibly you shall have grace; but I can say to every one, Let him use the means, and leave the success of his labor and his own salvation to the will and good pleasure of God. I cannot say this infallibly, for there is no obligation upon God. And still this work is made the fruit of God's will and mere arbitrary dispensation-'Of His own will begat He us by the Word of Truth' (James 1:18). Let us do what God hath commanded, and let God do what He will. And I need not say so; for the whole world in all their actings are and should be guided by this principle. Let us do our duty, and refer the success to God, Whose ordinary practice is to meet with the creature that seeketh after Him; yea, He is with us already; this earnest importunity in the use of means proceeding from the earnest impression of His grace. And therefore, since He is beforehand with us, and hath not showed any backwardness to our good, we have no reason to despair of His goodness and mercy, but rather to hope for the best" (Vol. XXI, page 312).
God has been pleased to give to men the Holy Scriptures which "testify" of the Saviour, and make known the way of salvation. Every sinner has the same natural faculties for the reading of the Bible as he has for the reading of the newspaper; and if he is illiterate or blind so that he is unable to read he has the same mouth with which to ask a friend to read the Bible to him, as he has to enquire concerning other matters. If, then, God has given to men His Word, and in that Word has made known the way of salvation, and if men are commanded to search those Scriptures which are able to make them wise unto salvation, and they refuse to do so, then it is plain that they are justly censureable, that their blood lies on their own heads, and that God can righteously cast them into the Lake of Fire.
In the third place, should it be objected, Admitting all you have said above, Is it not still a fact that each of the non-elect is unable to repent and believe? The reply is, Yes. Of every sinner it is a fact that, of himself, he cannot come to Christ. And from God's side the "cannot" is absolute. But we are now dealing with the responsibility of the sinner (the sinner foreordained to condemnation, though he knows it not), and from the human side the inability of the sinner is a moral one, as previously pointed out. Moreover, it needs to be borne in mind that in addition to the moral inability of the sinner there is a voluntary inability, too. The sinner must be regarded not only as impotent to do good but as delighting in evil. From the human side, then, the "cannot" is a will not;it is a voluntary impotence. Man's impotence lies in his obstinacy. Hence, is everyone left "without excuse," and hence, is God "clear" when He judgeth (Psa. 51:4), and righteous in damning all who "love darkness rather than light."
That God does require what is beyond our own power to render is clear from many Scriptures. God gave the Law to Israel at Sinai and demanded a full compliance with it, and solemnly pointed out what would be the consequences of their disobedience (see Deut. 28). But will any readers be so foolish as to affirm that Israel were capable of fully obeying the Law! If they do, we would refer them to Romans 8:3 where we are expressly told, "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh."
Come now to the New Testament. Take such passages as Matthew 5:48, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in Heaven is perfect." 1 Corinthians 15:34. "Awake to righteousness, and sin not." 1John 2:1, "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not." Will any reader say he is capable in himself of complying with these demands of God? If so, it is useless for us to argue with him.
But now the question arises, Why has God demanded of man that which he is incapable of performing? The first answer is, Because God refuses to lower His standard to the level of our sinful infirmities. Being perfect, God must set a perfect standard before us. Still we must ask, If man is incapable of measuring up to God's standard, wherein lies his responsibility? Difficult as it seems the problem is nevertheless capable of simple and satisfactory solution.
Man is responsible to (first) acknowledge before God his inability, and (second) to cry unto Him for enabling grace. Surely this will be admitted by every Christian reader. It is my bounden duty to own before God my ignorance, my weakness, my sinfulness, myimpotence to comply with His holy and just requirements. It is also my bounden duty, as well as blessed privilege, to earnestly beseech God to give me the wisdom, strength, grace, which will enable me to do that which is pleasing in His sight; to ask Him to work in me "both to will and to do of His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).
In like manner, the sinner, every sinner, is responsible to call upon the Lord. Of himself he can neither repent nor believe. He can neither come to Christ nor turn from his sins. God tells him so; and his first duty is to "set to his seal that God is true." His second duty is to cry unto God for His enabling power; to ask God in mercy to overcome his enmity and "draw" him to Christ; to bestow upon him the gifts of repentance and faith. If he will do so, sincerely from the heart, then most surely God will respond to his appeal, for it is written, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Rom. 10:13).

A W PINK
 
Upvote 0

GrinningDwarf

Just a humble servant
Mar 30, 2005
2,732
276
60
✟26,811.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I told you guys...Pink is fight club!!
box2.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: cygnusx1
Upvote 0

heymikey80

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Dec 18, 2005
14,496
921
✟41,809.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So God is saying whoever causes child melestation should be put to death and then he says I cause child melestation?
Throwing stones from glass houses I see.

God caused child molesters to exist. He could've prevented their existence. He can, even now. He didn't.

Let's get on the same page here. You've got the same problem with your own theology. This isn't anything more than the Problem of Evil.

God created with intent. God's primary intent is to show His nature as Redeemer, beyond His Justice, beyond His Love, integrating them both in Redemption. God's intent in ordaining evil was not evil itself. Therefore God's absolved of your accusation -- as if you could judge God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cygnusx1
Upvote 0

UMP

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2004
5,022
116
✟5,772.00
Faith
Christian
Does God cause the little ones that believe in him to sin?
If not then how is God the cause of all things?
UMP
To decree someone to sin is evil therefore believing God doesn't decree evil doesn't make that person denying sovereignty of God.

..From chapter 16 of Hassell's History:
God, by the withdrawal of His sustaining influence, is no more the proper
cause of sin than the sun, by its departure, is the proper cause of darkness
and cold, but God is thus proved to be the fountain of all holiness, as the
sun is proved to be the fountain of light and heat... it would be strange
arguing indeed, because men never commit sin only when God leaves them to
themselves, and always sin when He does so, that therefore their sin is not
from themselves, but from God, and so that God must be a sinful being; as
strange as it would be to argue, because it is always dark when the sun is
gone, and never dark when the sun is present, that therefore all darkness is
from the sun, and that the sun itself is dark and cold, and its beams are
black and frosty... God overrules all the evil that He permits for the
ultimate good of His people and glory of His name.

From the London Confession, regarding "God's Decree":
1. God has decreed in Himself from all eternity, by the most wise and holy
counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things which shall
ever come to pass.
- Yet in such a way that God is neither the author of sin nor does He have
fellowship with any in the committing of sins, nor is violence offered to
the will of the creature , nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second
causes taken away, but rather established.
- In all this God's wisdom is displayed, disposing all things, and also His
power and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree.
2. Although God knows everything which may or can come to pass under all
imaginable conditions, yet He has not decreed anything because He foresaw it
in the future, or because it would come to pass under certain conditions.
3.By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and
angels are predestinated or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus
Christ, to the praise of His glorious grace. Others are left to act in their
sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His glorious justice.

Hope this helps. Part of the difficulty, of course, is that God's ways are
simply above our ways and so we cannot hope to understand all the workings
of His sovereignty any more than we can hope to grasp all the workings of
the Trinity.
 
Upvote 0

Boxmaker

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2006
596
9
Arvada, CO
✟23,292.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
..From chapter 16 of Hassell's History:
God, by the withdrawal of His sustaining influence, is no more the proper
cause of sin than the sun
, by its departure, is the proper cause of darkness
and cold, but God is thus proved to be the fountain of all holiness, as the
sun is proved to be the fountain of light and heat... it would be strange
arguing indeed, because men never commit sin only when God leaves them to
themselves, and always sin when He does so, that therefore their sin is not
from themselves, but from God, and so that God must be a sinful being; as
strange as it would be to argue, because it is always dark when the sun is
gone, and never dark when the sun is present, that therefore all darkness is
from the sun, and that the sun itself is dark and cold, and its beams are
black and frosty... God overrules all the evil that He permits for the
ultimate good of His people and glory of His name.

From the London Confession, regarding "God's Decree":
1. God has decreed in Himself from all eternity, by the most wise and holy
counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things which shall
ever come to pass.

- Yet in such a way that God is neither the author of sin nor does He have
fellowship with any in the committing of sins, nor is violence offered to
the will of the creature , nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second
causes taken away, but rather established.
- In all this God's wisdom is displayed, disposing all things, and also His
power and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree.
2. Although God knows everything which may or can come to pass under all
imaginable conditions, yet He has not decreed anything because He foresaw it
in the future, or because it would come to pass under certain conditions.
3.By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and
angels are predestinated or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus
Christ, to the praise of His glorious grace. Others are left to act in their
sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His glorious justice.

Hope this helps. Part of the difficulty, of course, is that God's ways are
simply above our ways and so we cannot hope to understand all the workings
of His sovereignty any more than we can hope to grasp all the workings of
the Trinity.
Don't you see the contridiction between the highlighted sentences? The first sentence says God does not cause evil. The second sentence says God is the direct author of whatsoever comes to pass. I am not accepting that God's ways are just above our ways. To a degree, they are. But on issues of salvation and understanding who God is, they are not. God wants us to know who He is and what it takes to be saved. Setting up such an obvious contridiction is not from God, it reeks of man.
 
Upvote 0

UMP

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2004
5,022
116
✟5,772.00
Faith
Christian
Don't you see the contridiction between the highlighted sentences? The first sentence says God does not cause evil. The second sentence says God is the direct author of whatsoever comes to pass. I am not accepting that God's ways are just above our ways. To a degree, they are. But on issues of salvation and understanding who God is, they are not. God wants us to know who He is and what it takes to be saved. Setting up such an obvious contridiction is not from God, it reeks of man.

No, I don't see a contradiction. The same way I don't see a contradiction in the trinity of 3 being 1.
 
Upvote 0

Boxmaker

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2006
596
9
Arvada, CO
✟23,292.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No, I don't see a contradiction. The same way I don't see a contradiction in the trinity of 3 being 1.
I see no contridiction in the trinityu either. I do in Calvinist theology. Both the Westminster and the London confessions have the same problem. A=God ordains whatsoever happens. B=God does not ordain evil. If A is true then B cannot be true. If B is true, then A cannot be true.

I have seen people on this form attempt to explaine it by saying God has a revealed will and a secret will. You believe it because you don't understand the trinity either. I have seen other long and conveluted explinations that attempt to explain how a God who ordained everything is only responsible for the good things.

Oddly enough, I have never seen the one answer that would make sense. Your explination is the closest I've yet seen.

The London and the Westminster are confessions of faith. You believe it on faith and faith alone. You need no further explination.
 
Upvote 0

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟94,926.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I see no contridiction in the trinityu either. I do in Calvinist theology. Both the Westminster and the London confessions have the same problem. A=God ordains whatsoever happens. B=God does not ordain evil. If A is true then B cannot be true. If B is true, then A cannot be true.

I have seen people on this form attempt to explaine it by saying God has a revealed will and a secret will. You believe it because you don't understand the trinity either. I have seen other long and conveluted explinations that attempt to explain how a God who ordained everything is only responsible for the good things.

Oddly enough, I have never seen the one answer that would make sense. Your explination is the closest I've yet seen.

The London and the Westminster are confessions of faith. You believe it on faith and faith alone. You need no further explination.

that is because you have a simplistic view of causation........


"God's decree concerning sin was "permissive" not "efficacious"
The best Scriptural term to describe God's relationship toward the inclusion of evil in his universe is "permit". God "allows" or "permits" his creatures to rebel. He is not to be thought of as being in them rebelling against his own moral principles. He has "allowed" (eiasen from eao) them to act upon their corrupted desires.

Acts 14:16 "and in the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways;" Acts 17:30 "therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all everywhere should repent."

Therefore we say that God is not the cause of sin. The term "cause" is used of that which is directly responsible for an action or that which directly brings a change or action into being. The sinner is the one held directly responsible for his sin and persons other than God are always considered the direct agents of evil. This is consistent with the traditional philosophical uses of the term (see Runes Dictionary of Philosophy pg. 48 where he identifies cause as that which is actually "responsible" for a change, motion or action.) To call God the "cause of sin" would be to use this term in an improper manner. Similarly it would be an error to call God the author of sin. An author is always the efficient cause of his work, and is responsible for it.

Is God not said to be the cause of evil?
Sometimes bad translations of the original biblical text can make God appear to be the author or cause of sin. But a more faithful translation shows the original intent of the passage. The Hebrew word ra` means "calamity, disaster, harm". It can only be used of something wicked as a derived and secondary usage. It is not equivalent with the Hebrew term kha-TAH' which means "sin, do evil, fail, miss". The second term is not used with respect to the actions of God. Only the first. God, as Lord of all creation, is certainly behind what we might term calamities or natural disasters. But such things are not evil in that they have no wicked intentions contrary to the revealed moral principles of God.

In Isaiah 45:7 the LORD (Jehovah) is said to "create" calamity. The NASB properly translates it; "...causing well-being, and creating calamity;" and the NIV translates; "...I bring prosperity and create disaster;". Sadly the old King James Version has rendered it in a moral sense: "I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (KJV)

In Amos 3:6 the LORD (Jehovah) is said to be the cause of calamity when it occurs in a city. The NASB accurately translates; "... if a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it?" The NIV renders it; "... when a disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it?". Again the older King James Version has translated it as moral evil: "... shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?"

Ultimately we cannot truly solve the problem of sin's permission since God has not revealed the details explaining what he says he has done. There is no question concerning the fact of its permission since that is directly revealed. The problem we face has to do with God's employment of the evil deeds of creatures as a part of his certain plan. Even the Arminian concedes that God foreknows all things, including the advent of sin and its consequences. A.A. Hodge explains, "He (the Arminian) is unable as the Calvinist is to explain why God, notwithstanding that certain knowledge, did not change those conditions." (Confession of Faith pg. 68)

God is Not the Creator of sin:
Sin is not an independently existing created thing. It is an attribute, a moral condition of an agent which is contrary to moral good as defined by God's own nature. It is no more a created thing than is "good".

God's attributes are not created, they are eternal. Good is eternal because it is a characteristic of the divine nature. The creation of imperfect morally fallible and mutable creatures would bring into existence the possibility of the opposite of God's perfections. We see by revelation that in his relationship to such creatures and to the moral evil they produce, God intends to display his own perfections.

It is nothing short of blasphemy to say that God is the cause of sin, once we understand what the Bible reveals about God and sin. This doctrine establishes the reality of "Secondary Causes"
Though God is not the cause of sin, it does have a cause. Evil can only be found in the creature. Therefore the creature is the only efficient and proximate cause of sin. We are not created as just machines following impersonal programming. We are persons who act morally. We are responsible for our actions before God. This is why the doctrine of the decrees differs so completely from the doctrine of fatalism. "

http://www.girs.com/library/theology...bus/theo4.html
 
Upvote 0

UMP

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2004
5,022
116
✟5,772.00
Faith
Christian
I see no contridiction in the trinityu either. I do in Calvinist theology. Both the Westminster and the London confessions have the same problem. A=God ordains whatsoever happens. B=God does not ordain evil. If A is true then B cannot be true. If B is true, then A cannot be true.

I have seen people on this form attempt to explaine it by saying God has a revealed will and a secret will. You believe it because you don't understand the trinity either. I have seen other long and conveluted explinations that attempt to explain how a God who ordained everything is only responsible for the good things.

Oddly enough, I have never seen the one answer that would make sense. Your explination is the closest I've yet seen.

The London and the Westminster are confessions of faith. You believe it on faith and faith alone. You need no further explination.

I never said God does not cause or create evil, for He does:

Isaiah 47:
[7] I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

What I am saying and what we have all been trying to tell you is that God ordains everything yet is WITHOUT SIN, without guilt. God is NOT guilty of sin or wrongdoing as he creates, ordains, causes evil to fall upon guilty sinners.

Job 1:
[21] And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.
[22] In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.

Job 2:
[10] But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

Job 13:
[15] Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him.
 
Upvote 0

Boxmaker

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2006
596
9
Arvada, CO
✟23,292.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Would anybody care to take a run at a VERY difficult question? I warn you now that the wording of the question may sound very accusatory and down right mean. It is not intended that way, I just don’t know any other way to ask it. It has to do with praising God’s glory in the aftermath of VT.
 
Upvote 0

bradfordl

Veteran
Mar 20, 2006
1,510
181
✟25,108.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Would anybody care to take a run at a VERY difficult question? I warn you now that the wording of the question may sound very accusatory and down right mean. It is not intended that way, I just don’t know any other way to ask it. It has to do with praising God’s glory in the aftermath of VT.
Go for it, Box.
 
Upvote 0

GrinningDwarf

Just a humble servant
Mar 30, 2005
2,732
276
60
✟26,811.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
It has to do with praising God’s glory in the aftermath of VT.


Would that be anything like praising God's glory in the aftermath of World War Two? The Holocost? Hurricane Katrina? An eight-year-old girl who falls off her bike, hits her head on the sidewalk, and dies after a two-week coma?
 
Upvote 0

Boxmaker

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2006
596
9
Arvada, CO
✟23,292.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Would that be anything like praising God's glory in the aftermath of World War Two? The Holocost? Hurricane Katrina? An eight-year-old girl who falls off her bike, hits her head on the sidewalk, and dies after a two-week coma?
Very Similar.
 
Upvote 0