Featured Calvinism's conumdrum, Is God the Author of sin?

And in the "work" of baptism" they claim that God is doing the baptizing and not man. And yet the baptism God does is the circumcision done without hands, in other words in and by the Spirit. Last time I checked, water baptism was done by the hands of men.

 

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

A child can understand this.

 

God will do what he has stated.
However, he is limited by certain factors.
Though God has stated his will is to save all men, all men will not be saved because man's heart is depraved and all men will not accept his offer.
Nevertheless God is a God of love continually and always reaching down to all men in love desiring to save them. That will never changes. That love never changes. There are not two kinds of love as the Calvinists proclaim. God is love. His everlasting love is towards all his creatures that they all might be saved.
He does not delight in the death of the wicked.

Thus the desire for God for all men to be saved will not change.
He knows that all men will not be saved.

God's desire or even will, that all men will not perish, that all men will come to repentance is true.
It is hindered by man's depraved heart. Man has a free will. If man chooses not to accept his gift of salvation, then his will will not be accomplished. But his will or desire remains the same. His everlasting love remains the same. It does not diminish.

In truth Calvinism is divided as it is portrayed on the board.
But if a person is going to logically follow the tenets of Calvinism he cannot be an Amyraldianist or a Combatabilist. They are just Calvinistic compromisers that don't know how to think logically. Take TULIP and carefully think each tenet through one by one. The Calvinist must believe in hard determinism. He must believe in a definite Limited Atonement, etc. He cannot exclude any of the points, for all five come as a package. As SBM well knows accepting all makes God the author of evil. That conclusion cannot be avoided. There is only one kind of Calvinist in the end. Many don't want to accept it. But they don't want to think carefully through the logical consequences of believing all five points either.

 

I believe he is referring to understanding the spiritual meaning.....a spiritual understanding.

1 Cor 2:14 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

 

What do you mean by "author of sin"? The God made the rules, and therefore determines what sin is???? Or that he causes sin? That statement is dangerous and needs clarification.

 

Calvin himself said God is not the author of sin multiple times. As did Augustine. To say God is the author of sin is to blasphemy against his name...... If you mean that he causes sin.......... God being the author of sin does not, and has no reason to be linked to Calvinism or reformed theology. I believe you are confusing God's sovereign will with his perceptive will. Sin is a violation of his perceptive will. Not part of his sovereign will. If it was his sovereign will for us to sin.....well, it wouldn't be a sin. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying. I hope I am. Please clarify.

 

DHK,

What is God limited by? Man's free will?

 

That viewpoint would indeed be the false calvinism views that DHK is rightly troubled about!

Those views are NOT what most in calvinism would support though, thank God!

 

Yes, for in that understanding of free will and relation to God, the lord has done all that He can do to save a sinner, by providing death of Jesus for them, raising him from the grave, but he still waits to see if they will respond to him in order to allow him to save them...

 

He has determined to save particular ones called the elect. He does not reveal Himself to the rest.

You are being very anti-biblical DHK. You portray God's will as being trumped by the almighty free-will fiction. You claim that God's will is thwarted by the depraved hearts of His creatures. You assert that God just can't manage to overcome that hurtle.

Yet the Bible speaks of the fact that the Lord does all that He pleases. His purposes will stand. What He plans will indeed be accomplished.

True enough.

So SBM has become your model. Just disregard 99.9% of all Calvinists from your field of vision and focus on the fringe.

You are myopic.

You are out of your element. Your "one kind of a Calvinist"theory cannot be sustained since the vast majority disavow your muddled conclusions.

 

In this one point alone you fail.
You continue to state this but never to define it. So let me do it for you.

"God, before the beginning of time wanted to select some for himself. He didn't know exactly who, so He decided to throw all the names in a large black rabbit's hat. He gave those names a good stir and then took out ten percent of the names and wrote them in a book. He called that book "The Book of Life."
The rest of those names he set on a shelf to be disposed at a later time called the "The Great White Throne Judgement."
Now there are few events that happen between then and the GWT, but that is about as definite as I can make it for your beliefs Rippon.
Have I made any mistakes?
Did He also have an aide to do the choosing for Him?

Your story never gives a "basis" a "reason" for the "selection".
It is "This is what God did." Period. We get to make up the rest of the story.
Then the Calvinist answers (if any one dare question him).
--It is a mystery; the secret things belong unto the Lord, etc.
Balderdash.

We know why some were elected to eternal life, and why others end up in Hell. The Bible is very clear about that. But because it goes against the teachings of TULIP, the Calvinist must reject it.

 

Calvin himself has contradicted himself in many areas.
He can be quoted in one place as saying that God is the author of sin, and then in another place denying the same thing.

 

I don't want to dignify your incredible blasphemy by quoting it.

You have disgraced yourself many times on the BB by saying disgraceful things. Yet you continue to march forward in your same ole' pattern. You have no conscience. You demonize Calvinists and try to do the same to God Himself. You have no shame.

 

Document where he has said the former. If you can't, then cease from making that claim.

 

If God did not "randomly" select some, and either allow, or "determine" that the rest go to hell, then please explain on what basis did he select those who are called the elect unto eternal life.
It wasn't all guess work was it?

 

God does nothing randomly. No Calvinist or true Christian would ever say that about God and His character. But you, in your anti-Calvinist tirades have brought that old blasphemy up again and again.

It certainly is not due to any merits in the creature. He did it for the praise of His glorious grace. It is due to His pleasure and will. Do yourself a favor and review Ephesians 1:1-14.

In Romans 9:22 it tells us that God demonstrates His wrath and power by enduring with great patience the objects of His wrath prepared for destuction.

And it also informs us that the riches of His glory are made known to the objects of His mercy (the elect) whom He prepared in advance for glory. (Verse 23)

 

Only when he presented opposing arguments. Calvin did not believe God was the author of sin.

 

Yet another shameful denial of biblical truth....you will never see it at this rate. God will not be mocked by scoffers .Multitudes are allowed to see and welcome the truth...you are not at this point. It should be a concern for you, but you scoff in unbelief instead

 

Such scoffing and mocking of truth shows where he is and it is not in a good place. There is no valid excuse for this.

To mock in this way is a sign of unbelief. Anyone understanding the fear of God which is biblical would not do this ...or even come close to this.

 

I have studied this passage extensively. It says nothing of election to salvation or especially reprobation. Election always refers to the blessings of the believer. It is directed to the one who already believes, the one who already has salvation. This is where the Calvinist is wrong. He twists this scripture to make it mean something it doesn't.

It is so obvious that "we are to be to the praise of his glory," is not speaking of reprobation, but of our service before God.

Again, more scripture taken out of context and used wrongly.

Rom 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
--What if? The statement is hypothetical. It is not a pronouncement.
Paul uses a number of such statement in 1Cor.13:1-3

1 Corinthians 13:1 If I speak with the languages of men and of angels, but don't have love, I have become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.
2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but don't have love, I am nothing.
3 If I dole out all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but don't have love, it profits me nothing. (WEB)
--"If I give my body to be burned..."
It is a hypothetical (as all of the above are), but Paul didn't give his body to be burned. He was beheaded as a martyr.

Romans 9:22 is written in exactly the same way.
Rom 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
--But who said God was willing to show his wrath?
Here is a Calvinist supposition.
Furthermore, the real truth here is that no one said that God made any vessels of wrath that were fitted to destruction.
The verse doesn't state that. What if...God made those. It doesn''t say that!
What if God made popsicles, toothpicks, etc. It is a hypothetical.

"Vessels of wrath fitted for destruction"
Concerning the word "fitted" A.T. Robertson says:

Paul does not say here that God did it.

From Vine's

It is not simply a one-sided decision made from the beginning of time. God's judgment comes when man sins. He does not create man for sin.

Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
--As mentioned, election always refers to the believers.

The conclusion:
Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
Rom 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
God made his choice based on their obedience to him.
Righteousness was granted according to their faith, not according to blind election.