Arminians and Sovereignty

[Luke2427]

If God controls every event and causes it to happen, then God is the author of evil. When a pervert molests a child, God determined that would happen by your reasoning.

God is in control, but he allows men free choice. The scriptures show this.

Jer 7:31 And they have built the high places of Tophet, which [is] in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded [them] not, neither came it into my heart.

Jer 19:5 They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire [for] burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake [it], neither came [it] into my mind:

In both these verses God says the Jews were sacrificing their children to Baal, burning them in fire. In both verses he says he never commanded it. He says he never spake it in Jer 19:5. He says this act did not come into his heart or mind.

So, there you have it, men are allowed to act freely. Does God know what men are doing? Yes. Could God stop it? Yes. But it is clear God allows men to act independently. God is still in complete control, he will judge all of us for whether we have done good or evil.

Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

God provides the means of faith, his word. But whether men choose to believe his word or reject it is solely up to them. But God is still in control and every one of us will have to account before him.

Winman, God does not command me to breathe, but he controls my breathing. I breathe by his power. I will stop breathing the moment he stops powering my lungs. What he commands has nothing to do with what he controls.

The fact that God did not command them to burn their children proves nothing.

Your contention is that God had no control over the burning of their children. He was not in control as they burned them. He ruled, powered, controlled the vast cosmos except for one tiny stretch of land that night. Thus, according to your belief, God is not truly sovereign.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke, you're misrepresenting Arminianism. We don't believe that man has free will in salvation or the ability to do good apart from the grace of God. It is God's sovereign choice to do things the way He does. I've posted this before, and I'll post it again- The Five Articles of Remonstrance so you can know what Arminians really believe instead of the Calvinist strawmen you're throwing out.

I was an Arminian for better than a decade. I was first educated at an Arminian college. I am familiar with the Remonastrants and the tenets of Arminians taken from the teachings of their late founder, Arminius.

The doctrine set forth claims sovereignty but then undermines it.

RC Sproul said this week at the Expository Preaching Conference in Mobile that the first page of everyone's Systematic Theology, their Theology Proper, looks the same. Arminians and Calvinists alike use the same terms and practically the same definitions. The difference is that Calvinists do ont contradict their first page with the rest of their theology- Armininians do.

 

[Luke2427]

Define "complete control of all things". If you mean nothing happens apart from God's decreed, declarative or permissive will...the answer is yes. If you mean He directs everything (including sin), it's obviously no.

Why is it obvious? Make a case. What if we all just said, "obviously" instead of forming arguments? This would be a pretty pointless site wouldn't it.

I don't think it is obvious; in fact, I think it is obvious that God works ALL THINGS after the counsel of his own will and that of him and through Him and to Him are all things.

 

[webdog]

Why is it obvious? Make a case. What if we all just said, "obviously" instead of forming arguments? This would be a pretty pointless site wouldn't it.

You need me to make a case on the fact God does not make a person sin?!? Really? Well, first God does not tempt us to sin, so logically He doesn't make us sin. Second, He does not command us to not sin while making us sin at the same time. He is no bipolar.

I don't think it is obvious; in fact, I think it is obvious that God works ALL THINGS after the counsel of his own will and that of him and through Him and to Him are all things.

Nothing here disagrees with the first part of my post. If God makes man sin, God sins and He is not God. If you disagree, the burden of proof is on you to show that God wants and makes man sin.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Someone might want to make a distinction between mediate and immediate control/sovereignty. This discussion is going nowhere otherwise

And Paul, the true weakness of historical Arminianism is not in their view of God's sovereignty (it really not significantly different from the Calvinists view, and any true difficulties you may raise creates the same or corresponding difficulties for the Calvinist view). The only real weakness is their view of the will, but that weakness is very difficult to draw out. But good luck either way

 

[Luke2427]

You need me to make a case on the fact God does not make a person sin?!? Really? Well, first God does not tempt us to sin, so logically He doesn't make us sin. Second, He does not command us to not sin while making us sin at the same time. He is no bipolar.
Nothing here disagrees with the first part of my post. If God makes man sin, God sins and He is not God. If you disagree, the burden of proof is on you to show that God wants and makes man sin.

God is ultimately responsible for evil. There is no logical way around that. What you have not yet considered, as I had not for many years, is that evil... is a necessary evil.

God always intended to create man who he knew would sin which would provide God with the opportunity to magnify his grace and mercy on Calvary and to raise up a people who would praise his son forever for his grace.

Evil in that sense is good because it brings glory to God. Anything that brings glory to God is good because that is the measure of what is good.

God was working the fall out for his own purposes. He intended Adam to fall, he intended for sin to enter the world. He would use it for his glory which is the highest and noblest of purposes in the universe.

Without evil, there cannot be grace and mercy.

That men suffer and many go to hell is a small, infinitely small price to pay for the eternal glory of God he receives for his mercy and grace.

God created evil for that purpose. This is why he hardens hearts and drives men to do what they do.

The alternative is to purport that things happen totally outside the control of God but then God comes along and works them out after they have happened- that is not Sovereignty.

 

[dwmoeller1]

The alternative is to purport that things happen totally outside the control of God but then God comes along and works them out after they have happened- that is not Sovereignty.

There are other alternatives to this. For one, go with Augustine's view of sin and the idea of sin being created becomes moot one way or the other.

 

[Luke2427]

There are other alternatives to this. For one, go with Augustine's view of sin and the idea of sin being created becomes moot one way or the other.

Yea, I think Augustine's view of evil being the privation of good is accurate- just as darkness is not a thing; it is the absence of light.

But Sovereignty, at least exhaustive sovereignty (which is really the only kind a divine, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being can possess) demands that God is Lord even over the privation- he is God even of the hole.

And there is no denying that the privation of good was necessary to the extension of grace and mercy whereby Christ will be magnified forever.

The problem some folks have with God being ultimately responsible for evil is that they think that if it is evil to us then it is evil for God- not so.

What is evil for us can be perfectly good for God. By evil comes great virtues: courage is not possible without evil. Sacrifice is not possible without evil. Grace and Mercy, etc... Evil grants the ability for these virtues to exist which makes evil a good thing.

 

[webdog]

God is ultimately responsible for evil. There is no logical way around that. What you have not yet considered, as I had not for many years, is that evil... is a necessary evil.

Let me get this straight...if I'm a car salesman and I sell a car to someone who drives drunk and kills someone, I'm ultimately responsible? You have God confined to a linear box. It is a mystery how an infinite God interacts with finite man within and outside of time. God did not create sin. God's creations created sin.

God always intended to create man who he knew would sin which would provide God with the opportunity to magnify his grace and mercy on Calvary and to raise up a people who would praise his son forever for his grace.

How do you know God's intentions? We know the realities of what has occurred, buy how do you know His intentions? If He desires man does not sin, yet intended to create sin, you have a "house divided" that Christ spoke out against.

Evil in that sense is good because it brings glory to God. Anything that brings glory to God is good because that is the measure of what is good.

There is no sense to a holy and righteous God where evil is ever "good". That is blasphemy.

God was working the fall out for his own purposes. He intended Adam to fall, he intended for sin to enter the world. He would use it for his glory which is the highest and noblest of purposes in the universe.

I agree He worked out the fall as He does every event and instance of sin...but to claim He desired or wanted the fall?

Without evil, there cannot be grace and mercy.

According to who?

That men suffer and many go to hell is a small, infinitely small price to pay for the eternal glory of God he receives for his mercy and grace.

...yet He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Doesn't exactly sound like "glory".

God created evil for that purpose. This is why he hardens hearts and drives men to do what they do.

You really need to take the TULIP glasses of when reading Scripture.

The alternative is to purport that things happen totally outside the control of God but then God comes along and works them out after they have happened- that is not Sovereignty.

That is your only alternative...open theism. God's remains sovereign even when He allows events to occur without directly directing the events. Your view completely removes "ability" from responsibility. If I am forced into doing something, I cannot be held accountable for either doing or not doing it.

 

[Luke2427]

Let me get this straight...if I'm a car salesman and I sell a car to someone who drives drunk and kills someone, I'm ultimately responsible? You have God confined to a linear box. It is a mystery how an infinite God interacts with finite man within and outside of time. God did not create sin. God's creations created sin.

Your anecdote doesn't follow. God is not a finite car salesman. The salesman has no power over what the buyer does with the car he sales. Are saying God has no power over the creatures he creates? Then you do not believe that god is Sovereign. It's as simple as that. Arminians love to SAY they believe in Sovereignty, they know to deny it is heresy, so they ascribe to the title while undermining the concept.

How do you know God's intentions?

Because God told us. Read Ephesians 2 among a host of other passages we could cite.

We know the realities of what has occurred, buy how do you know His intentions? If He desires man does not sin, yet intended to create sin, you have a "house divided" that Christ spoke out against.

God uses sin for his own glory. God creates hurricanes and earthquakes and all kinds of things that we count as evil- yet he makes them for his own glory. I don't see this as some kind of insurmountable philosophical problem.

There is no sense to a holy and righteous God where evil is ever "good". That is blasphemy.

You don't know what you are talking about.

I agree He worked out the fall as He does every event and instance of sin...but to claim He desired or wanted the fall?
According to who?

If he did not want the fall in any sense whatsoever, explain how it happened if God is Sovereign.

...yet He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Doesn't exactly sound like "glory

".

There is a sense in which he does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked, but there is another sense in which he laughs at their calamity and he that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh at their destruction.

There is a sense in which God does not wish for any to perish but he is more than willing for many of them to perish for the greater good- his glory for their destruction and his praise for his grace and mercy which he bestowed upon those he saved.

You really need to take the TULIP glasses of when reading Scripture.
That is your only alternative...open theism.

Open theism is the product of Armininanism not calvinism. Open theism is exactly what your doctrine leads to when you follow it out to its logical conclusions.

God's remains sovereign even when He allows events to occur without directly directing the events. Your view completely removes "ability" from responsibility. If I am forced into doing something, I cannot be held accountable for either doing or not doing it.

You CANNOT??? Tell the Almighty that, why don't you. Who are you to reply against your Maker and say he should not have made you the way he did? Tell God he CANNOT hold someone accountable. That he must bend to YOUR standards of right and wrong. That is utterly ridiculous.

 

[Amy.G]

God is ultimately responsible for evil. There is no logical way around that. What you have not yet considered, as I had not for many years, is that evil... is a necessary evil.

God always intended to create man who he knew would sin which would provide God with the opportunity to magnify his grace and mercy on Calvary and to raise up a people who would praise his son forever for his grace.

Evil in that sense is good because it brings glory to God. Anything that brings glory to God is good because that is the measure of what is good.

God was working the fall out for his own purposes. He intended Adam to fall, he intended for sin to enter the world. He would use it for his glory which is the highest and noblest of purposes in the universe.

Without evil, there cannot be grace and mercy.

That men suffer and many go to hell is a small, infinitely small price to pay for the eternal glory of God he receives for his mercy and grace.

God created evil for that purpose. This is why he hardens hearts and drives men to do what they do.

The alternative is to purport that things happen totally outside the control of God but then God comes along and works them out after they have happened- that is not Sovereignty.

That is some messed up theology.

God does not require evil in order for Him to be glorified.

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify me with your own self with the glory which I had with you before the world was.

Jesus had glory with the Father before He created the world. Before Adam brought sin into the world.

God is glorified apart from anything Adam did or I did or you did.

 

[Luke2427]

That is some messed up theology.

God does not require evil in order for Him to be glorified.

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify me with your own self with the glory which I had with you before the world was.

Jesus had glory with the Father before He created the world. Before Adam brought sin into the world.

God is glorified apart from anything Adam did or I did or you did.

Sure he had glory Amy, sure he did. But there are things that he could not get glory for without sin and evil.
Explain how he gets glory for mercy without sin.
Explain how he gets glory for grace without sin.
Explain the need of sacrifice and how he gets glory for it without sin.

You guys are responding in knee jerk fashion to what you perceive as blasphemy without considering it is the theology of Spurgeon and Edwards and a host of other greats throughout Christian history.

To read this post and knee jerk declare that it is messed up theology is to condemn the theology of the greats as well.

Think it through, don't just knee jerk respond.

How does God get glory for unmerited favor without sin? Now don't run away at this point. You attacked- now stay int he pocket and answer the question.

 

[Luke2427]

There is no sense to a holy and righteous God where evil is ever "good". That is blasphemy.

Since you have retreated for the night just when you were getting cornered, I thought I would give you some Edwards on the above accusation of blasphemy and let you call him a blasphemer if you so choose.

Thus in one sense God wills that what he hates come to pass, as well as what he loves.

Edwards says,

God may hate a thing as it is in itself, and considered simply as evil, and yet . . . it may be his will it should come to pass, considering all consequences. . . . God doesn't will sin as sin or for the sake of anything evil; though it be his pleasure so to order things, that he permitting, sin will come to pass; for the sake of the great good that by his disposal shall be the consequence. His willing to order things so that evil should come to pass, for the sake of the contrary good, is no argument that he doesn't hate evil, as evil: and if so, then it is no reason why he may not reasonably forbid evil as evil, and punish it as such.

 

[Luke2427]

You need me to make a case on the fact God does not make a person sin?!? Really? Well, first God does not tempt us to sin, so logically He doesn't make us sin. Second, He does not command us to not sin while making us sin at the same time. He is no bipolar.
Nothing here disagrees with the first part of my post. If God makes man sin, God sins and He is not God. If you disagree, the burden of proof is on you to show that God wants and makes man sin.

Here is the proof you request:

God often expresses his will to be one way, and then acts to bring about another state of affairs. God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 – "He turned their hearts to hate his people."). He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1). He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10). He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11). He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16). He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28). He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26).

 

[Luke2427]

I cannot improve upon Jonathan Edwards on this matter. For those who really want to know the truth about evil rather than just drive by posting against someone who you disagree with in a knee jerk fashion read below what the greatest theological mind in American history had to say on the matter:

It is a proper and excellent thing for infinite glory to shine forth; and for the same reason, it is proper that the shining forth of God's glory should be complete; that is, that all parts of his glory should shine forth, that every beauty should be proportionably effulgent, that the beholder may have a proper notion of God. It is not proper that one glory should be exceedingly manifested, and another not at all. . . .

Thus it is necessary, that God's awful majesty, his authority and dreadful greatness, justice, and holiness, should be manifested. But this could not be, unless sin and punishment had been decreed; so that the shining forth of God's glory would be very imperfect, both because these parts of divine glory would not shine forth as the others do, and also the glory of his goodness, love, and holiness would be faint without them; nay, they could scarcely shine forth at all.

If it were not right that God should decree and permit and punish sin, there could be no manifestation of God's holiness in hatred of sin, or in showing any preference, in his providence, of godliness before it. There would be no manifestation of God's grace or true goodness, if there was no sin to be pardoned, no misery to be saved from. How much happiness soever he bestowed, his goodness would not be so much prized and admired. . . .

So evil is necessary, in order to the highest happiness of the creature, and the completeness of that communication of God, for which he made the world; because the creature's happiness consists in the knowledge of God, and the sense of his love. And if the knowledge of him be imperfect, the happiness of the creature must be proportionably imperfect.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

God is ultimately responsible for evil. There is no logical way around that. What you have not yet considered, as I had not for many years, is that evil... is a necessary evil.

That's some seriously screwed up theology. By saying God is the author of sin, you commit borderline blasphemy. God did not create evil because it goes against His holy nature. God causes or allows all things to occur. Sin is something that He allows, not causes. Just because God can do something, doesn't mean He is obligated to do so. For example, God could have chosen to elect people to salvation unconditionally, but the Scriptures indicate He did not.

 

[Luke2427]

That's some seriously screwed up theology. By saying God is the author of sin, you commit borderline blasphemy. God did not create evil because it goes against His holy nature. God causes or allows all things to occur. Sin is something that He allows, not causes. Just because God can do something, doesn't mean He is obligated to do so. For example, God could have chosen to elect people to salvation unconditionally, but the Scriptures indicate He did not.

Once again, knee jerk reaction rather than a thoughtful one.

Call Jonathan Edwards guilty of borderline blasphemy. I have his thoughts on it quoted above.

Call Charles Spurgeon a blasphemer.

It is not about that he is the direct author of sin, but that he willed the existence of sin. He is the Sovereign ruler of all things including the creation of evil.

That's Bible. There are a host of Bible passages two or three posts up that I provide.

This is classical theology. It is reformation theology. To call it blasphemy is to identify your own ignorance.

 

[th1bill]

Amy is right, it is a fool's play to believe that evil must exist for God to be glorified. All in all though both groups are wrong! Any time you follow any man and not God, as per His own revelation in His own Word, you have gone amiss!

Further, to sit here arguing these fool's points of view, instead of digging into the whole word of God is to enlarge Satan's Playground. Neither point of view is a Salvation issue and that makes all three, secondary issues. That's right, all three! Calvinist, Armenian and Biblicist. I am of the later persuasion, if God said it, I believe it and it is up to me to listen to the Holy Spirit, as I read the entire Bible, including the commentary (the New Testament) to understand how it all ties together.

The very moment a man rips any scripture out of the light of all other scripture, he fosters heresy!

 

[Luke2427]

Amy is right, it is a fool's play to believe that evil must exist for God to be glorified. All in all though both groups are wrong! Any time you follow any man and not God, as per His own revelation in His own Word, you have gone amiss!

Further, to sit here arguing these fool's points of view, instead of digging into the whole word of God is to enlarge Satan's Playground. Neither point of view is a Salvation issue and that makes all three, secondary issues. That's right, all three! Calvinist, Armenian and Biblicist. I am of the later persuasion, if God said it, I believe it and it is up to me to listen to the Holy Spirit, as I read the entire Bible, including the commentary (the New Testament) to understand how it all ties together.

The very moment a man rips any scripture out of the light of all other scripture, he fosters heresy!

Is this guy for real???

 

[FR7 Baptist]

Once again, knee jerk reaction rather than a thoughtful one.

Call Jonathan Edwards guilty of borderline blasphemy. I have his thoughts on it quoted above.

Call Charles Spurgeon a blasphemer.

If they meant what you meant, then they are guilty of borderline blasphemy.

It is not about that he is the direct author of sin, but that he willed the existence of sin. He is the Sovereign ruler of all things including the creation of evil.

God allowed sin to exist and He is the sovereign ruler of all things. Arminianism upholds the perfect sovereignty of God over all things. It teaches us the biblical truth that God has sovereignty elected to salvation all who will come to faith in Christ. It teaches that we are totally depraved and can do no good without the action of the grace of God in our lives, that only Christ can save, and we in no way contribute to our salvation.