Weep Over Jerusalem?

[cygnusx1]

The Reformed view on the permissive aspect relating to sin and Gods Decree ��

"In the previous chapter of the confession concerning God’s nature it was shown that God maintains absolute control over all things. This idea will be taken up further in our study of God’s Providence. In this present section we are concerned primarily with his control of the moral actions of persons in his creation.

God is able to prevent men from sinning. For example, God speaking to Abimelech concerning Abraham’s wife said in Genesis 20:6, “I also kept you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her.”

God is also able to use the sins of His creatures to accomplish His decrees. When Joseph’s brothers conspired to kill him and sell him into slavery it is said, “God sent me before you to preserve for you a remnant in the earth, and to keep you alive by a great deliverance. Now, therefore, it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh and lord of all his household and ruler over all the land of Egypt.” (Genesis 45:7-8), and, “And as for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result to preserve many people alive.” (Genesis 50:20)

Elsewhere in the Bible the same principle is taught…

Psalm 76:10 “for the wrath of man shall praise Thee;”

Acts 14:16 “in the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways;”

Psalm 106:15 “so He gave them their request”

Though sin is able to be restrained by God, and though he obviously permits it, he always employs it for his ultimate glory. However, sin is never said to be produced by God, and sin is never said to be condoned by him. Sin remains that which is contrary to the moral principles of God.

Since the mind of God is not divided into parts (there are no parts of him that could know something detached from anything else he knows) the decrees relating to sin and evil are not separate things from his overall plan for the universe. Everything is altogether and eternally inclined toward his ultimate plan of glory and good. This indivisible plan is revealed to us in individual parts because that is how we finite beings come to understand things. Systematic knowledge is only a characteristic of the creature. To divide up the divine mind into such compartments is to degrade the unified and perfect nature of God. Therefore to see sin as an act of God would put him in rebellion against himself. This is inconsistent with the self revealed nature of God and is self contradictory.

All That Is, Exists for God’s Glory
God made all things to declare his nature and glory.

Colossians 1:16 “for in 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.”

Some things manifest the riches of God’s glory:

Romans 9:23 “He did so in order that He might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory”

Some things manifest God’s wrath:

Romans 9:22 “What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?”

God, in creating the best kind of universe for making his attributes and glory known, made a universe that would include sin and evil. That does not make evil “good”. It would not follow logically. The Scriptures teach that God is not the author of sin or of evil. God’s word is not unclear when allowed to speak for itself. The overwhelming testimony of the Bible is agreed upon by all who accept it as God’s word. Note that the following highly regarded professors and theological writers all concur on this as a clearly stated biblical fact.

B.B. Warfield: Biblical & Theological Studies p283
J.O. Buswell Jr.: A Systematic Theology (Vol I) pp163-169, 262-272
J.O. Buswell Jr.: A Systematic Theology (Vol II) pp 154-156
L. Berkhoff: Systematic Theology p 220
W.G.T. Shedd: Dogmatic Theology (Vol I) pp 405-415
L. Boettner: Reformed Doctrine of Predestination pp 228-253
A. Hodge: The Confession of Faith pp 63-69
C. Hodge: Systematic Theology (Vol I) pp 429-436
John Calvin: Institutes of Christian Religion I:18,II:4:3,III:21-24
John Bunyan: The Doctrine of Election & Reprobation Chapter VI
Horatius Bonar: The Five Points of Calvinism pp 63-64
Stephen Charnock: The Existence & Attributes of God pp 473-532
Martin Luther: The Bondage of the Will pp 83-93
J. Zanchius: Absolute Predestination p 20
Westminster Assembly: Westminster Confession of Faith III:1, V:4
Guy de Bres: Belgic Confession XIII:1
Synod of Dort: Canons of Dort I:15

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" (ειασε&#957 from "eao" (εα&#969] 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. A more faithful translation shows the original intent of the passage. The Hebrew word ra` (ך&#1506 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’ (חט&#1488 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. However, 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 does not float about in the universe as an independent and unattached entity. 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.

Note: The Bible quotations in this syllabus are from the New American Standard Bible (1988 edition) unless otherwise noted.

http://www.genevaninstitute.org/syllabus/unit-two-theology-proper/lesson-4-the-decrees-of-god/

 

[JackSparrow]

Thanks Cygnusx1 very much for searching this article out and posting it.

My comment are NOT to criticize it in any way shape or form. My comments do criticize those who in particular hold to Calvinism but post different doctrines and conclusions to those detailed below. I am not 'calvie bashing'. There is a lot of different versions of Calvinism even among the few posting here on CF and when some say "you do not understand Calvinism" it is often evident neither do they.

The Reformed view on the permissive aspect relating to sin and Gods Decree ��

"In the previous chapter of the confession concerning God’s nature it was shown that God maintains absolute control over all things. This idea will be taken up further in our study of God’s Providence. In this present section we are concerned primarily with his control of the moral actions of persons in his creation.

God is able to prevent men from sinning. For example, God speaking to Abimelech concerning Abraham’s wife said in Genesis 20:6, “I also kept you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her.”

God is also able to use the sins of His creatures to accomplish His decrees. When Joseph’s brothers conspired to kill him and sell him into slavery it is said, “God sent me before you to preserve for you a remnant in the earth, and to keep you alive by a great deliverance. Now, therefore, it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh and lord of all his household and ruler over all the land of Egypt.” (Genesis 45:7-8), and, “And as for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result to preserve many people alive.” (Genesis 50:20)

Elsewhere in the Bible the same principle is taught…

Psalm 76:10 “for the wrath of man shall praise Thee;”

Acts 14:16 “in the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways;”
Permitted, NOT controlled like a puppet - They have some form of free will.
NOT total free will. LIMITED free will.

Psalm 106:15 “so He gave them their request”
Ditto

Though sin is able to be restrained by God, and though he obviously permits it, he always employs it for his ultimate glory. However, sin is never said to be produced by God, and sin is never said to be condoned by him. Sin remains that which is contrary to the moral principles of God.
In the last two days several posters on other threads have stated "God ordains all things" yes "God is the author of sin. Then isolated a text to 'prove' that notion. This paragraph in effect states they are quiet wrong.

"Sin remains that which is contrary". I have posted several time "God is NOT willing that any should perish". Yet this has been shot down by several Calvinist.

Since the mind of God is not divided into parts (there are no parts of him that could know something detached from anything else he knows) the decrees relating to sin and evil are not separate things from his overall plan for the universe. Everything is altogether and eternally inclined toward his ultimate plan of glory and good. This indivisible plan is revealed to us in individual parts because that is how we finite beings come to understand things. Systematic knowledge is only a characteristic of the creature. To divide up the divine mind into such compartments is to degrade the unified and perfect nature of God. Therefore to see sin as an act of God would put him in rebellion against himself. This is inconsistent with the self revealed nature of God and is self contradictory.
Exactly the point I have been trying to put over, e.g in the debate

. God is NOT the author. To isolate a text e.g Is 45:7 -I make peace and I create evil; is to distort the overall message and claim God is against himself.

All That Is, Exists for God’s Glory
God made all things to declare his nature and glory.

Colossians 1:16 “for in 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.”

Some things manifest the riches of God’s glory:

Romans 9:23 “He did so in order that He might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory”

Some things manifest God’s wrath:

Romans 9:22 “What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?”
The "What if" is often missed in posts

God, in creating the best kind of universe for making his attributes and glory known, made a universe that would include sin and evil. That does not make evil “good”. It would not follow logically. The Scriptures teach that God is not the author of sin or of evil. God’s word is not unclear when allowed to speak for itself. The overwhelming testimony of the Bible is agreed upon by all who accept it as God’s word. Note that the following highly regarded professors and theological writers all concur on this as a clearly stated biblical fact.

List snipped - Although they agree, it is not total. Even on CF most Calvinist stand clear from John Calvin.

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" (ειασε&#957 from "eao" (εα&#969] them to act upon their corrupted desires.
Exactly. As the articles from CARM show. Permissive will is NOT decretive will. Quite separate. NOT the same.

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. A more faithful translation shows the original intent of the passage. The Hebrew word ra` (ך&#1506 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’ (חט&#1488 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. However, 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)
I have not seen this before. Fantastic stuff.

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)
Absolutely correct. Should save a lot of repeat posts on CF

God is Not the Creator of sin:
Sin is not an independently existing created thing. It does not float about in the universe as an independent and unattached entity. 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.
This shoots down supralapsaianism. I.e the teaching that God predestined even Adams sin.

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.
I would add 'ordains sin' as well as it means the same as cause.

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.
Many Calvinists go wrong here, not knowing the difference between predestination and fatalism

Note: The Bible quotations in this syllabus are from the New American Standard Bible (1988 edition) unless otherwise noted.

Lesson 4 – The Decrees of God

Wow.

I have posted against Calvinism and have been labeled and responded to as an Arminian just here to attack Calvinism by a few. Yet there are flaws in Calvinism ( yes Arminianism as well ) which even some Calvinist recognize. IMO Cygnusx1's article has shot a lot of threads to pieces. Also cleared a lot of things up.

Thank you Cygnusx1.

 

[Arcoe]

The Reformed view on the permissive aspect relating to sin and Gods Decree ��

"In the previous chapter of the confession concerning God’s nature it was shown that God maintains absolute control over all things. This idea will be taken up further in our study of God’s Providence. In this present section we are concerned primarily with his control of the moral actions of persons in his creation.

God is able to prevent men from sinning. For example, God speaking to Abimelech concerning Abraham’s wife said in Genesis 20:6, “I also kept you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her.”

God is also able to use the sins of His creatures to accomplish His decrees. When Joseph’s brothers conspired to kill him and sell him into slavery it is said, “God sent me before you to preserve for you a remnant in the earth, and to keep you alive by a great deliverance. Now, therefore, it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh and lord of all his household and ruler over all the land of Egypt.” (Genesis 45:7-8), and, “And as for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result to preserve many people alive.” (Genesis 50:20)

Elsewhere in the Bible the same principle is taught…

Psalm 76:10 “for the wrath of man shall praise Thee;”

Acts 14:16 “in the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways;”

Psalm 106:15 “so He gave them their request”

Though sin is able to be restrained by God, and though he obviously permits it, he always employs it for his ultimate glory. However, sin is never said to be produced by God, and sin is never said to be condoned by him. Sin remains that which is contrary to the moral principles of God.

Since the mind of God is not divided into parts (there are no parts of him that could know something detached from anything else he knows) the decrees relating to sin and evil are not separate things from his overall plan for the universe. Everything is altogether and eternally inclined toward his ultimate plan of glory and good. This indivisible plan is revealed to us in individual parts because that is how we finite beings come to understand things. Systematic knowledge is only a characteristic of the creature. To divide up the divine mind into such compartments is to degrade the unified and perfect nature of God. Therefore to see sin as an act of God would put him in rebellion against himself. This is inconsistent with the self revealed nature of God and is self contradictory.

All That Is, Exists for God’s Glory
God made all things to declare his nature and glory.

Colossians 1:16 “for in 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.”

Some things manifest the riches of God’s glory:

Romans 9:23 “He did so in order that He might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory”

Some things manifest God’s wrath:

Romans 9:22 “What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?”

God, in creating the best kind of universe for making his attributes and glory known, made a universe that would include sin and evil. That does not make evil “good”. It would not follow logically. The Scriptures teach that God is not the author of sin or of evil. God’s word is not unclear when allowed to speak for itself. The overwhelming testimony of the Bible is agreed upon by all who accept it as God’s word. Note that the following highly regarded professors and theological writers all concur on this as a clearly stated biblical fact.

B.B. Warfield: Biblical & Theological Studies p283
J.O. Buswell Jr.: A Systematic Theology (Vol I) pp163-169, 262-272
J.O. Buswell Jr.: A Systematic Theology (Vol II) pp 154-156
L. Berkhoff: Systematic Theology p 220
W.G.T. Shedd: Dogmatic Theology (Vol I) pp 405-415
L. Boettner: Reformed Doctrine of Predestination pp 228-253
A. Hodge: The Confession of Faith pp 63-69
C. Hodge: Systematic Theology (Vol I) pp 429-436
John Calvin: Institutes of Christian Religion I:18,II:4:3,III:21-24
John Bunyan: The Doctrine of Election & Reprobation Chapter VI
Horatius Bonar: The Five Points of Calvinism pp 63-64
Stephen Charnock: The Existence & Attributes of God pp 473-532
Martin Luther: The Bondage of the Will pp 83-93
J. Zanchius: Absolute Predestination p 20
Westminster Assembly: Westminster Confession of Faith III:1, V:4
Guy de Bres: Belgic Confession XIII:1
Synod of Dort: Canons of Dort I:15

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" (ειασε&#957 from "eao" (εα&#969] 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. A more faithful translation shows the original intent of the passage. The Hebrew word ra` (ך&#1506 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’ (חט&#1488 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. However, 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 does not float about in the universe as an independent and unattached entity. 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.

Note: The Bible quotations in this syllabus are from the New American Standard Bible (1988 edition) unless otherwise noted.

Lesson 4 – The Decrees of God

Thank you cygnus. This is something I can agree with, except on a few points. I will get to them later, though Jack did a good job of pointing them out. If this were in the Westminster Confessions, it would make a world of difference.

 

[JackSparrow]

Thank you cygnus. This is something I can agree with, except on a few points. I will get to them later, though Jack did a good job of pointing them out. If this were in the Westminster Confessions, it would make a world of difference.

"If this were in the Westminster Confessions, it would make a world of difference"


It sure would.

 

[cygnusx1]

Thanks Cygnusx1 very much for searching this article out and posting it.

My comment are NOT to criticize it in any way shape or form. My comments do criticize those who in particular hold to Calvinism but post different doctrines and conclusions to those detailed below. I am not 'calvie bashing'. There is a lot of different versions of Calvinism even among the few posting here on CF and when some say "you do not understand Calvinism" it is often evident neither do they.




[/COLOR]




Wow.

I have posted against Calvinism and have been labeled and responded to as an Arminian just here to attack Calvinism by a few. Yet there are flaws in Calvinism ( yes Arminianism as well ) which even some Calvinist recognize. IMO Cygnusx1's article has shot a lot of threads to pieces. Also cleared a lot of things up.

Thank you Cygnusx1.

You are welcome although on several points you have failed still to grasp the issue and yes it is in the WCF

The permissive aspect is part of Gods decree , God permits not by necessity but by Divine wisdom executed by Divine will , ie , every action on earth passes under Gods will .

 

[JackSparrow]

You are welcome although on several points you have failed still to grasp the issue and yes it is in the WCF

The permissive aspect is part of Gods decree , God permits not by necessity but by Divine wisdom executed by Divine will , ie , every action on earth passes under Gods will .

Pooh. Now you are backtracking and going around the proverbial circle.

Bottom line from the article - saying God is the author of sin, or words thereof, is blasphemy. Not my words, words from the article. REMEMBER THAT.

Summary

Two flaws with Calvinism are now exposed.
1. The sufficient vs efficient conundrum.
2. Permissive will is NOT the same as decretive will. The article gives sufficient ( and efficient ) proof.

Some posters on CF state that those not holding to any form of Calvinism are NOT unsaved heretics ( maybe cygnus you are not one of them). So at some future time there will a meeting of minds. The differences between the divide will be resolved. My mission is to get there sooner rather than later. I.e shed medieval dogma. Why ? dunno, its the way I'm made. Perhaps God is having a laugh at my expense.

I'm saddened you have back tracked on the fine article you posted. It is because those filthy hypocrite Arminians supported it isn't it.

And no, the WCF differs.

 

[cygnusx1]

Backtrack ? Hardly , that would mean I changed my view , I haven't , the decree of God is all encompassing all inclusive and universal.

I understand the difference between permission and effect , and both are operating within Gods will , does God will the death of sinners ? Obviously otherwise no sinner could die , it is God who introduced the Law which is the basis for sinners dying , otherwise men would die by accident , it would be an incident independent of Gods will , clearly it isn't. ... Genesis
6

The WCF ALSO distinguishes between what God wills by effect and what He wills by permission (sin) , all events work together for good to those called by God , thus there can be nothing to seperate us from Gods love because He does work all things together for good , which cannot be true if there are some things , anything , which is not working together for our good.

A potter knows exactly when and where to apply pressure upon the clay (will of effect) as well as when and how to release the pressure upon the clay (will of permission) in order to obtain the desired effect.

 

[cygnusx1]

Further witness to the standard Reformed view showing the permissive aspect in Gods decree of sin.

"2 (a) The fact and nature of God’s decree. The title and content of this chapter speak of God’s decree in the singular. The Larger and Shorter Catechisms speak of God’s decrees in the plural. This may suggest that the question of whether we speak of the decree or the decrees was not regarded as significant. It may also suggest that the different documents had in view different aspects of the subject. The distinction may be useful when we take account of differences in what people believe concerning what they call 'the order of the decrees' – the difference between the Supralapsarian and Infralapsarian schemes.

We have to bear in mind the unity of the divine decree. As Dabney puts it, 'It is one act of the divine mind; and not many . . . prothesis, a "purpose", a "counsel". It follows from the nature of God . . . the whole decree is eternal and immutable. All therefore must co-exist together always in God’s mind. . . . God’s plan is shown, in its effectuation, to be one; cause is linked with effect, and what was effect becomes cause.' As he goes on to say, 'All who call themselves Calvinists admit that God’s decree is, in His mind, a cotemporaneous unit'.3 But as Herman Bavinck explains, 'The one and only and eternal decree of God is gradually and little by little unfolded before the eye of the creature, unfurling itself in many events and happenings, each of which in turn points back to a definite moment in the single decree of God, so that in our human language we speak of the decrees of God in the plural. This manner of speech should not be condemned as long as we maintain and recognise the close relation that obtains between the several decrees and the fact that in God the decree is one.'4

As another Dutch theologian puts it: 'In considering God’s decree we must differentiate between viewing this decree relative to the decreeing God, it being a singular act of His will, or relative to the matters which have been decreed. In the latter there are as many dimensions to this decree as there are matters to which this decree relates'.5 Decree describes God’s eternal will, purpose, good pleasure, plan, as the single unit that it is in the mind of the eternal and unchangeable God. Decrees describes that purpose as it comes to expression in all its variety in its outworking and in the observation of finite creatures of time.

2 (b) Freedom within the absolute and totally comprehensive 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 ( Westminster Confession 3:1).

The absolute and totally comprehensive nature of the divine decree could not be stated more unambiguously. Every single thing which takes place takes place in accordance with the purpose of God, a purpose determined by himself in the exercise of his own free will, characterised by infinite wisdom, and put into effect inevitably and in every detail. Nothing is excluded from this positive foreordination of God. And it is free from all change. As A A Hodge says in his Outlines of Theology: 'There can never be any addition to his wisdom, nor surprise to his foreknowledge, nor resistance to his power; and therefore there never can be any occasion to reverse or modify that infinitely wise and righteous purpose which, from the perfection of his nature, he formed from eternity'.6

This is something quite different from the heathenish doctrine of fate. It is different in that, instead of being the product of the blind necessity of material causes, all that comes to pass is determined by the living and true God, who is 'a Spirit, infinite, eternal and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth'.7 It is also quite different from fate in that it does not deprive agents of responsibility for what they will and do and in that it does not do away with the meaningfulness of second causes or the reality of the connection between second causes and their effects. As A A Hodge says in The Confession of Faith: God’s decree 'is in all things consistent with his own most wise, benevolent, and holy nature' and 'is in all things perfectly consistent with the nature and mode of action of the creatures severally embraced within it'.8

A wide and very important field of enquiry opens up here in which we have to tread warily, as it is full of man-made pitfalls. Whatever attempts may be made by theologians or philosophers to try to explain, or explain away, how that which is infallibly and unchangeably decreed by God can yet be the free action of the person who does it, we have ultimately to accept both sides of the proposition because they are affirmed in Scripture.

Three classic expressions of this truth are found in what we may think is one of the least theological books of the New Testament, the Acts of the Apostles: 'Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain' (2:23); 'The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done' (4:26-28); 'And now I exhort you to be of good cheer: for there shall be no loss of any man’s life among you, but of the ship. For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve, saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar: and, lo, God hath given thee all them that sail with thee. Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer: for I believe God that it shall be even as it was told me . . . And Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved' (27:22-26,31).

A A Hodge affirms that 'all the decrees of God are equally efficacious in the sense that they all infallibly determine the certain futurition of the event decreed. Theologians, however, classify the decrees of God thus: 1st. As efficacious, in as far as they respect those events which he has determined to effect through necessary causes, or by his own immediate agency. 2nd. As permissive, as far as they respect those events which he has determined to allow dependent free agents to effect.' These references to 'permission' and 'allowing' are attempts to conserve the biblical truth that God is not the author of sin and that intelligent creatures act according to their own will and on their own responsibility.

Hodge goes on to say: 'All the sins which men commit, the Scriptures attribute wholly to the man himself. Yet God’s permissive decree does truly determine the certain futurition of the act; because God, knowing certainly that the man in question would in the given circumstances so act, did place that very man in precisely those circumstances that he should so act. But in neither case, whether in working the good in us, or in placing us where we will certainly do the wrong, does God in executing his purpose ever violate or restrict the perfect freedom of the agent'.9

In Evangelical Theology A A Hodge says that 'the decree at the same time determines that man shall be a free agent, shall possess a certain character, shall be surrounded by a certain environment, shall be specifically solicited by certain external influences, shall be internally moved by certain spontaneous affections, shall deliberately canvass certain reasons, and shall freely make certain choices. The man thus is, as far as a finite creature may be, entirely self-moved and self-determined, and therefore he is free.'10 James Fisher, in The Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained asks, 'Is the permissive decree a bare inactive permitting of evil? No, it determines the event of the evil permitted, and overrules it to a good end, contrary to the intention of the work and worker . . . It is permissive with respect to the sinfulness of the action as a moral evil; and efficacious with respect to the matter of it as a natural act'.11

Because of the liability to misconceptions, it is best to keep clear of the terminology of permission, as the Confession itself does here, unless carefully guarded and qualified, and just to recognise the truth which it is seeking to conserve, which is well expressed by Dabney: 'God’s decree "foreordains whatsoever comes to pass"; there was no event in the womb of the future, the futurition of which was not made certain to God by it. But we believe that this certainty is effectuated in different ways, according to the different natures of God’s creatures. One class of effects God produces by his own immediate agency . . . The other class of effects is the spontaneous acts of rational free agents other than God.'12 As A A Hodge says of these free acts of free agents: 'If the plan of God did not determine events of this class, he could make nothing certain, and his government of the world would be made contingent and dependent, and all his purposes fallible and mutable'.13

We have to be content to assert the fundamental teaching of the first section on the basis of the biblical revelation, and agree with John Dick that 'upon such a subject no man should be ashamed to acknowledge his ignorance. We are not required to reconcile the divine decrees and human liberty. It is enough to know that God has decreed all things which come to pass, and that men are answerable for their actions. Of both these truths we are assured by the Scriptures; and the latter is confirmed by the testimony of conscience'.14 This first section enforces Calvin’s advice in his Institutes of the Christian Religion: 'Let it, therefore, be our first principle that to desire any other knowledge of predestination than that which is expounded by the Word of God is no less infatuated than to walk where there is no path, or to seek light in darkness. Let us not be ashamed to be ignorant in a matter in which ignorance is learning' (3.21.2).

http://www.banneroftruth.co.uk/pages/articles/article_detail.php?1420

 

[JackSparrow]

Backtrack ? Hardly , that would mean I changed my view , I haven't , the decree of God is all encompassing all inclusive and universal.

I understand the difference between permission and effect , and both are operating within Gods will , does God will the death of sinners ? Obviously otherwise no sinner could die , it is God who introduced the Law which is the basis for sinners dying , otherwise men would die by accident , it would be an incident independent of Gods will , clearly it isn't. ... Genesis
6

The WCF ALSO distinguishes between what God wills by effect and what He wills by permission (sin) , all events work together for good to those called by God , thus there can be nothing to seperate us from Gods love because He does work all things together for good , which cannot be true if there are some things , anything , which is not working together for our good.

A potter knows exactly when and where to apply pressure upon the clay (will of effect) as well as when and how to release the pressure upon the clay (will of permission) in order to obtain the desired effect.

You have changed on:

1. Sufficient vs Efficient. You said moderate Calvininsm is flawed and you are moving to high Calvinism.

2. You have contradicted yourself on the definition of Decretive vs Permissive will. Both the article and CARM are against you.

God is NOT the author of evil. Weasel words won't help you.

God is NOT willing that any should perish - Thus sayeth the Lord.

 

[JackSparrow]

Further witness to the standard Reformed view showing the permissive aspect in Gods decree of sin.

"2 (a) The fact and nature of God’s decree. The title and content of this

<SNIP>

Ok, the article you posted is all wrong. ALL the Calvinist theologians listed as agreeing with it - a long list - ALL made the same mistakes !


Right.

Thanks

 

[cygnusx1]

You have changed on:

1. Sufficient vs Efficient. You said moderate Calvininsm is flawed and you are moving to high Calvinism.

2. You have contradicted yourself on the definition of Decretive vs Permissive will. Both the article and CARM are against you.

God is NOT the author of evil. Weasel words won't help you.

God is NOT willing that any should perish - Thus sayeth the Lord.

You need to quote me in order to demonstrate I have changed , you will not because you mistake the CARM quote for my view .... It never was my view

Sufficient verses efficient is not even being discussed , the dichotomy is efficient and permissive , not efficient and sufficient

God is not the author of sin , the sinner is , nothing weasel about it .

 

[JackSparrow]

Standby

 

[cygnusx1]

Standby

What for ........ The other poster/s at your finger tips ?

 

[cygnusx1]

This is three quotes in a row each clearly show the decree of God is both effective as well as permissive , Gods decree governs all events in there entirety , nothing in history is left to chance ...

"God&#8217;s Purpose in Permitting Evil

By Massimo Lorenzini


For ages man has been perplexed over the existence of evil. Philosophers and theologians have agonized to understand why God would allow evil to exist. Is evil something that God has no control over and is just trying to make the best of a fallen world? Or, does evil somehow fit into God&#8217;s overall purpose for creation? This study is an attempt to answer the question of why does God permit evil? And, what difference should this make in my life?

According to Scripture, we currently live in a world characterized by evil.

3 Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen (Gal 1:3-5, emphasis added).[1]

But God is allowing evil to run its course for His own good and holy purposes.

11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory (Eph 1:11-12, emphasis added).

Divine Decrees

God&#8217;s purpose in history is described as His &#8220;decree.&#8221; Louis Berkhof, in his Manual of Christian Doctrine, defined God&#8217;s decree this way: &#8220;The decree of God is His eternal plan or purpose, in which He has foreordained all things that come to pass.&#8221;

The Westminster Shorter Catechism, Question 7, defines the decree of God similarly: &#8220;The decrees of God are, His eternal purpose, according to the counsel of His will, whereby, for His own glory, He hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.&#8221;

The Westminster Confession of Faith (ch. 3:1) explains a bit further about God&#8217;s decree saying:

God from all eternity did by the most 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.

The Westminster Standards carefully assert that God is not the author of sin. The origin of sin was neither in God, nor from His decree in any productive or efficient way. God simply permits sin and at the same time bounds and controls it for His wise and holy ends, even though these ends are inscrutable to men. Similarly, the free agency of the creature is not violated by the purpose of God. Men are free agents and the will of any man is not subject to any sort of coercion by the Creator, even though the acts of men as free agents, fully foreknown by God, can and do accomplish God&#8217;s purpose and are therefore certain.

The reality of second causes, with their dependent efficiency, is not destroyed, but rather established by the eternal purpose. The reason for this is that God&#8217;s plan includes means and ends in their relation to each other, so that both are alike related to the divine decree, and the result shall surely come to pass.

So God has a purpose in history and that purpose is designed to inspire worship and praise. Even the reality of evil, though God hates it in itself, serves the ultimate purpose of glorifying God.

11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory (Eph 1:11-12, emphasis added).

God rules over all events in history, including evil, for our good and His glory. John Piper says that God is not like a firefighter who gets calls to show up at calamities when the damage is already happening. He is more like the surgeon who plans the cutting he must do and plans it for good purposes. God rules over the beginning of our troubles as well as their end.

But to believe this takes genuine trust in God&#8217;s power and goodness. It forces one to come to grips with the Creator/creature distinction. The apostle Paul helps us to realize our place in God&#8217;s universe:

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth." 18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?" 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? 22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? (Romans 9:14-24).

Why has God decreed the entrance of sin and evil? According to Paul, God has a double purpose: First, to reveal His wrath against sin; second, to reveal the wealth of His grace as He saves &#8220;vessels of mercy.&#8221;

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory (Rom 9:22-23).

More of God is known by the entrance of sin and how He deals with it than would have been possible without the entrance of sin. We must come to accept the fact that God always acts in His own interest. God is the most God-centered person in the universe. Everything He does in history is to magnify and display His glory. You and I exist for God&#8217;s purposes, not for ourselves.

Fallen man loves to question God. In Romans 9, Paul gives a stern rebuke to those who do so. In this evil age, men give no thought to their creaturely status and their just condemnation before God. They arrogantly question God&#8217;s right to ordain events and to judge.

This kind of back-talk by the creature to his Creator is as absurd as a clay pot arguing with the potter. God has absolute sovereignty over His works. He answers to no one. The unbeliever falsely calls this fatalism. Such a charge displays one&#8217;s ignorance. For man&#8217;s acts are free acts. Men act out of who and what they are. Men are not robots. God does not compel or coerce them against their desires. Every choice man makes is a free choice (of course, one that is limited by his nature and therefore, fallen man cannot freely choose righteouness apart from the new birth).

The universe was made for God. He filled it with angelic beings to be an audience to His work in history. The angels are witness to all of God&#8217;s activity in the creation, fall, and redemption of man. Each stage in God&#8217;s redemptive plan is part of this &#8220;grand demonstration.&#8221; The salvation of God&#8217;s elect astonishes the angels.

10 Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, 11 searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. 12 To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven--things which angels desire to look into (1 Pet 1:10-12, emphasis added).

This presents a very humbling view of man&#8217;s significance. Man exists for God&#8217;s glory and pleasure. God is making His wisdom known to the angelic hosts through His redemptive work with the church.

8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ; 10 to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, 11 according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord (Eph 3:8-11, emphasis added).

It seems, from this passage of Scripture, that God has a point to make to the angels and this lesson is an additional feature of God's plan to manifest and magnify His glory.

God&#8217;s Three &#8220;Wills&#8221;

1. Preceptive will (Revealed will)
Conditional purpose with pleasure, sometimes broken. Related to man&#8217;s responsibility. "Preceptive" has to do with God's precepts or commands and instructions directed to His creatures (man) and the fulfillment of which is conditioned upon man's obedience. This is sometimes referred to as God's "will of command."

We see in Scripture that it is sometimes possible that God&#8217;s will is not accomplished.

But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him (Luke 7:30).

This is easily seen in the fact that God&#8217;s commands, such as the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:1-17) are consistently violated.

Is this God&#8217;s only will? If so, we would be faced with the following problems:

1. God could not predict the future. A parent gives commands or responsibilities to his or her children, but can a parent infallibly predict what course of action the child will take? No. The government can create laws, but can public officials know how the citizens will react to them? No. So, if God only had a preceptive will, then he would not be able to determine and foreknow the future.

2. Any redemptive plan of God could possibly fail. If God&#8217;s only activity in the universe was to instruct men of their duty, without willing to accomplish any definite result, His government might fall into chaos and collapse. It would be possible that God&#8217;s will could be thwarted in every case and He would not be able to control His creation.

3. Righteous people would live in uncertainty, fear, and doubt because evil might eventually triumph. They would be serving a God who either could not or would not ensure a victorious outcome in history.

2. Decretive will (Sovereign or Secret will) (efficient vs. permissive)
Unconditional purpose with pleasure, never broken. God has determined the ultimate outcome. God's decretive will has to do with His "decrees" or direct ordering of certain events in time. This is not conditioned upon man's obedience since God's decree has to do with things that shall infallibly come to pass because God directly wills it into being. Again, Louis Berkhof's definition of God's decree is helpful at this point: &#8220;The decree of God is His eternal plan or purpose, in which He has foreordained all things that come to pass.&#8221;

This aspect of God&#8217;s will is to be distinguished from His &#8220;permissive will&#8221; in which He permits sinful men to do evil acts. God&#8217;s decretive will can be described as His &#8220;efficient&#8221; will, that is to say, His willing something to be directly puts it into effect. God may decree evils acts, like the crucifixion of Christ, even though He is not directly effecting the act, but rather permitting sinful men to accomplish it (see Acts 2:22-23; 4:27-28). But even this is can fall under God&#8217;s decretive will.

See the following for Scriptural support: Isa 14:24-27; Dan 4:35; Luke 1:37; Eph 3:11; Eph 1:10.

Examples of God&#8217;s decretive will are: Creation, inspiration of the Bible, the work of Christ (incarnation, atonement, second coming), salvation (election, regeneration, preservation), future conversion of Israel (Zech 12:10-11; Rom 11).

3. Permissive will
Conditional purpose with displeasure; allowing evil and sin. See Ps 81:12; Acts 14:16; Rom 1:24.

God is utterly holy and cannot even look upon sin (Hab 1:13). God tempts no man (Jas 1:13). At times, God chooses not to interfere with the sinful intentions of His creatures. Evil is the absence or perversion of good. So all that is needed for evil to occur is for God to withdraw from the sinner and permit it to come to pass (God&#8217;s judgment upon the unrepentant Gentiles is His &#8220;giving them over&#8221; to their sinfulness in Rom 1). God is never the active agent in evil. To ascribe such to God is blasphemy. An analogy: The sun brings light and warmth by its essential nature. Darkness and cold exist only in the absence of the sun. So too, God is the source of all goodness and beauty. Evil exists only in the absence of God&#8217;s direct influence.

The objective of God&#8217;s will (preceptive, decretive, permissive) is the manifestation of His glory (the beauty of His divine perfections). All history is moving to this end:

For the earth will be filled With the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, As the waters cover the sea (Hab 2:14; cf. Isa 11:9).

Providence
Providence is the term used to describe the outworking in history of the three wills of God.

http://www.frontlinemin.org/print.asp?page=/evil.asp

 

[JackSparrow]

Standby

OK found it.

... because dare I say it , I now see certain flaws in 'moderate Calvinism' .....

Then we have the debate about decretive will vs permissive will. You article agrees with those links on CARM, both of which you disagree with. So why did you post an article you disagree with ? Weird.

I'll go with CARM and the Geneva article. They make sense. They agree with the Bible. Simple really.

 

[JackSparrow]

"This is three quotes in a row each clearly show the decree of God is both effective as well as permissive , Gods decree governs all events in there entirety , nothing in history is left to chance ..."

DEFLECTION

No one is or has ever said it is left to chance.

Shame on you.

 

[JackSparrow]

Bottom line.

http://www.genevaninstitute.org/syllabus/unit-two-theology-proper/lesson-4-the-decrees-of-god/

It is right or it is wrong.

No oh yes it is right the long winded weasal word saying no it is wrong.

It is right or it is wrong. Period.

 

[cygnusx1]

Nothing to deflect ...... Except for error .

 

[cygnusx1]

God is NOT willing that any should perish - Thus sayeth the Lord.

1 Samuel 2:25


New International Version (©1984)

If a man sins against another man, God may mediate for him; but if a man sins against the LORD, who will intercede for him?" His sons, however, did not listen to their father's rebuke, for it was the LORD's will to put them to death

 

[JackSparrow]

Nothing to deflect ...... Except for error .

Summary.

1. CARM articles state Decretive will is NOT permissive will they are different as in God is not willing that any should perish.

2. Reformed article posted here by cygnusx1 - Concurs Decretive will is NOT permissive will. They are different, it expounds in depth. The article HAMMERS home that saying God is the author of sin is BLASPHEMY.

This article is from Genevan Institute for Reformed Studies. I.e the Reformed of the reformed. Geneva, where Calvin was supreme. Those who hold to Reformed theology I.e Calvinist.

Now c1x is up in arms with both CARM ( a Calvinist web site) and Genevan Institute for Reformed Studies.

Confused ? Oh yes.