What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[Cormack]

I strongly recommend this book:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07VTS48L6/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_d_asin_title_o00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

It is dirt cheap and gives all the relevant ECF's quotes.

That book

 

[Clare73]

This is why I hang my hat on belief in the Lord, not on any interpretation of man, including me, who chase their tails like a bunch of dogs, no reflection on dogs : )

Falls somewhat short of Biblical demonstration giving merit to your assertion of my error in post #445. . .

 

[ReverendRV]

Could you answer my question more plainly? I’ve asked if you believe that God’s sovereign over your choices and actions, which would include that moment where you became “not your average Calvinist.”

Yes or no, then your rational behind the whole point.



Like saying “you meant it for evil, but God meant it for good.” I’m not meaning to upset that applecart of definitions, it’s here and it’ll be here for many generations to come, that doesn’t change the fact that God deterministically has his way when I reject Calvinism, and when you embrace what you call Calvinism.

Wouldn’t you agree to that? If you do, then yes, yes you believe that God is sovereign over your actions and choices, mine too.

You wouldn’t want to attribute your coming to Calvinism as a product of your own wisdom, intellect or righteousness, having these things over and above Christians who don’t want Calvinism.

No, I would not agree to that. For instance it never entered God's Mind to Cause Judah to Offer their children to Molech as a Child Sacrifice. Judah Offered their children to Molech of their own Free Will, not because of the constraining Will of God. Their Will and the Will of God flowed Concurrently as Primary and Secondary Causation. We do not know the Mind of God as to why he determined the Act; but we do know it wasn't as a Child Sacrifice. I tend to think he may have saved people from a future Hitler, etc. But whatsoever reason God had for determining this, we can rest assured it was a good reason...

Do you believe in the Providence of God?

 

[misput]

Calvin taught man are in 2 camps. Those predetermined/predestined to salvation or destruction before creation. Man can only do what was predetermined by God. So God chose most humanity for hell/eternal torment and a few for salvation. They use Jesus words you did not choose Me but I chose you. No one has a free will to choose God. God must draw/drag you first to Him ( against your will ) and regenerate you prior to belief and repentance. This is Calvinism 101 and I taught this for over 4 decades and its wrong. If God is really Love then calvinism is wrong. They will also elevate Gods hate above His love. They focus on the negative aspects of God to defend their beliefs.

In fact in both the Institutes of Calvin and the WCF Gods is Love is missing from the list of Gods attributes. Its obvious why if God is truly Love then their doctrines in tulip and double predestination collapse. Those doctrines are the exact opposite of love.

hope this helps !!!

You got it right bubba, makes more sense than anything I have heard on this thread lately : )

 

[Cormack]

Judah Offered their children to Molech of their own Free Will, not because of the Will of God.

Was that action within the (1) foreknowledge of God and (2) did God chose to create knowing that this would happen? According to Calvinists God knows the future because he has determined the future to be that way.

Their Will and the Will of God flowed Concurrently as Primary and Secondary Causation. We do not know the Mind of God as to why he determined the Act; but we do know it wasn't as a Child Sacrifice.

Gods knowledge (and as a consequence his will that the action be done) can’t be “Concurrently” with the wills of ignorant, finite man. To insist that man’s will is simultaneously happening alongside Gods will, yet God determined this to happen, that makes no sense.

That’s why Calvinists have repurposed words like sovereignty so that they can drive right down to the source, namely the will of God (which even in your own messages supersedes the will of man.)

whatsoever reason God had for determining this, we can rest assured it was a good reason...

So, despite horrible events like the sacrifice of children not being “in the mind” of God, God has determined them to happen since before the world began. You can appreciate the seeming futility of applying reason to these views, right?

Do you believe in the Providence of God?

General providence yes, not meticulous providence. Do you believe in meticulous providence? I’m not sure one answer would be as believable as another, since you seem to have your finger on every button simultaneously, still, we live in hope!

 

[misput]

Falls somewhat short of Biblical demonstration giving merit to your assertion of my error in post #445. . .

Which falls somewhat short of understanding my post 522 : )

 

[ReverendRV]

Was that action within the (1) foreknowledge of God and (2) did God chose to create knowing that this would happen? According to Calvinists God knows the future because he has determined the future to be that way.



Gods knowledge (and as a consequence his will that the action be done) can’t be “Concurrently” with the wills of ignorant, finite man. To insist that man’s will is simultaneously happening alongside Gods will, yet God determined this to happen, that makes no sense.

That’s why Calvinists have repurposed words like sovereignty so that they can drive right down to the source, namely the will of God (which even in your own messages supersedes the will of man.)



So, despite horrible events like the sacrifice of children not being “in the mind” of God, God has determined them to happen since before the world began. You can appreciate the seeming futility of applying reason to these views, right?



General providence yes, not meticulous providence. Do you believe in meticulous providence? I’m not sure one answer would be as believable as another, since you seem to have your finger on every button simultaneously, still, we live in hope!

We can always go back to your discussion. Regarding Providence, do you think God used General Providence to bring the Crucifixion of Christ to fruition?

I do; and I think you should say yes...

 

[Clare73]

Which falls somewhat short of understanding my post 522 : )

Not when you link it back. . .

 

[Cormack]

We can always go back to your discussion. Regarding Providence, do you think God used General Providence to bring the Crucifixion of Christ to fruition?

I do; and I think you should say yes...

Sure, we can hold two conversations. That means you’ll have to compose a meaningful response to post #525 however.

I think God orchestrated the confrontation and wouldn’t hand His son into their care, not wanting to heal simply that generation, but rather the whole world forever.

We both believe in general providence. Do you believe in meticulous providence? Because if you do, that pulls the rug out from under simple general providence.

I mean, returning to the crucifixion, Jesus does perceive that the crowd would make Him king, so He retreats. And again He knows that if He dropped the use of parables many would turn and be healed, but that’s not the game plan. The game plan was to harden the crowds heart, not deterministically, but by a ministry of parables and confronting the high earthly powers.

So let’s revisit my questions, then we can go from there.

 

[RickReads]

You got it right bubba, makes more sense than anything I have heard on this thread lately : )

Can you clarify what you mean by that? I think his post was mediocre.

 

[Clare73]

I think God orchestrated the confrontation and wouldn’t hand His son into their care, not wanting to heal simply that generation, but rather the whole world forever.
We both believe in general providence. Do you believe in meticulous providence? Because if you do, that pulls the rug out from under simple general providence.

I mean, returning to the crucifixion, Jesus does perceive that the crowd would make Him king, so He retreats. And again He knows that if He dropped the use of parables many would turn and be healed,
but that’s not the game plan. The game plan was to harden the crowds heart, not deterministically, but by a ministry of parables and confronting the high earthly powers.

The game plan was twofold:
1) not to give his enemies direct statements to use against him (Luke 8:10), in order to survive until the appointed time of his sacrifice, and
2) to fulfill prophecy in hardening the hearts of his enemies (Matthew 13:14-15).

 

[ReverendRV]

Sure, we can hold two conversations. That means you’ll have to compose a meaningful response to post #525 however.

I think God orchestrated the confrontation and wouldn’t hand His son into their care, not wanting to heal simply that generation, but rather the whole world forever.

We both believe in general providence. Do you believe in meticulous providence? Because if you do, that pulls the rug out from under simple general providence.

I mean, returning to the crucifixion, Jesus does perceive that the crowd would make Him king, so He retreats. And again He knows that if He dropped the use of parables many would turn and be healed, but that’s not the game plan. The game plan was to harden the crowds heart, not deterministically, but by a ministry of parables and confronting the high earthly powers.

So let’s revisit my questions, then we can go from there.

One reason I believe in Meticulous Providence is because Jesus Christ Meticulously orchestrated the Crucifixion himself. For this reason, I think you should also agree in Meticulous Providence...

Would you say that God Providentially determined the Selling of Joseph into Slavery? I would. Would you say that the Offering of the Children was Providentially governed by the Providence of God? I suspect you will agree...

Doesn't God do this in a way he is not the Author of Sin? How much Sovereignty is involved in God's Providence?

 

[misput]

Can you clarify what you mean by that? I think his post was mediocre.

That is the problem Rick, we are all mediocre at best.

 

[RickReads]

That is the problem Rick, we are all mediocre at best.

Not me brother I`m special.

 

[iwbswiaihl]

I strongly recommend this book:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07VTS48L6/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_d_asin_title_o00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

It is dirt cheap and gives all the relevant ECF's quotes.

Must be a book not highly valued if its dirt cheap or it would be in much demand, wouldn't it? Reading these last few pages seem as those there are some that place high value on their views not being in the reach of many of us. Of course, I am due to be wrong................Last time I remember being wrong was when I last made a post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[bmjackson]

Must be a book not highly valued if its dirt cheap or it would be in much demand, wouldn't it? Reading these last few pages seem as those there are some that place high value on their views not being in the reach of many of us. Of course, I am due to be wrong................Last time I remember being wrong was when I last made a post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The author, a professor, wants it to be available to everyone.

 

[RickReads]

Must be a book not highly valued if its dirt cheap or it would be in much demand, wouldn't it? Reading these last few pages seem as those there are some that place high value on their views not being in the reach of many of us. Of course, I am due to be wrong................Last time I remember being wrong was when I last made a post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sorry that you feel that way but I'm honestly not sure what you referring to. Can you clarify the comments you are referring to?

 

[RickReads]

This thread is pretty awesome. I hope it doesn't lose steam.

 

[iwbswiaihl]

The author, a professor, wants it to be available to everyone.

Sounds more like Biden but not many paying attention!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Cormack]

Must be a book not highly valued if its dirt cheap or it would be in much demand, wouldn't it?

I see some copies of the Bible going very cheap tbh, but I’d say they’re worth every penny and wouldn’t make too many negative assumptions on that basis.

One reason I believe in Meticulous Providence is because Jesus Christ Meticulously orchestrated the Crucifixion himself. For this reason, I think you should also agree in Meticulous Providence...

Okay. You believe in meticulous providence, then it’s very unfortunate and misleading to also write:

do you think God used General Providence to bring the Crucifixion of Christ to fruition?

I do;

You believe God brought about the crucifixion first by general providence, and later you insist he did these things by meticulous providence. You can’t have it both ways though, reading up on the two terms helps show that.

General providence

the only wise God has chosen to exercise general rather than meticulous providence, allowing space for us to operate and for God to be creative and resourceful in working with us. It was solely God’s decision not to control every detail that happens in our lives.
​

Meticulous providence

According to meticulous providence, God ordains everything that happens. Even acts that we view as evil happen because God wants them to happen and serve a good purpose in God’s plan. Thus there are no such things as accidents or tragedies.
​

There’s no such thing as general providence if you already hold to meticulous providence, as meticulous providence covers absolutely everything. So yes, you do appear to believe in “sovereignty” how Calvinists misdefine that word, and yes you must believe that your choice to believe in Calvinism was in reality caused by the Primary mover, meaning God.

You’re blessed to be best, as I’ve shared before. God’s acted on your life and choices in a meticulous fashion so that you’re drawn into the great spiritual institute of Calvinism. You’re ontologically superior by virtue of Gods grace over and above the rest of the Christian world.

You might not feel this way, for example, a man might insist that he’s a very special boy, and he’s not a determinist, so this man can be mistaken about being a very special boys while rejecting Calvinism, and you could be extremely humble while “believing” in Calvinism.

Though it’s not an example of the Calvinist being logically consistent, because the logically consistent Calvinists have the arrogance problem I’ve already shared via Desiring God and other Calvinist groups.

Would you say that God Providentially determined the Selling of Joseph into Slavery? I would. Would you say that the Offering of the Children was Providentially governed by the Providence of God? I suspect you will agree...

Not “meticulously,” that’s the point where we don’t agree, you’re using general providence and meticulous providence as synonyms as if you can jump between either phrase, that’s not helpful though. You have denied general providence in favour of meticulous providence, that’s okay though, because that’s Calvinism.

I’m going to have to press you again though, because I need you to carry the weight of conversation clash by responding to many of my answered points. You could start with that post you’ve neglected (#525,) since I’m not one to let go of my own points while throughly answering yours.