Featured Two Thoughts

People in the world want to have some say so in salvation, something that they can cling to in and of themselves to prove that they are saved. They refuse to rest in Christ's perfect righteousness alone, from first to last, for salvation. It is one of the main distinguishing characteristics between false religion and the gospel of Christ.

 

Remember, you are reasoning
with a mind affected by the fall,
which is so sin- cursed and blind
that you 'think' with it and say, "dead = alive".

 

The apostle Paul long ago refuted your tirade against God.

Romans 9:19-21 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

 

You seem to have misunderstood this text BF. We are all sinners but God has the right save those that will trust in His son and to leave those that do not.

 

Evidently, you think that you should have a hand in guiding the Potter's hands. The creatures are not sovereign in any manner whatsoever. God is.

 

Ken, I quoted my whole quote so you would realize that I agree that assurance is included in the faith that you have in Christ. However I stand by what I said. I am on solid ground with what the Puritan understanding of assurance involves and some of the more modern Calvinist theologians. This is from the Westminster Confession of Faith:
Chapter 16 OF GOOD WORKS point 2
"These good works, done in obedience to God's commandments, are the FRUITS AND EVIDENCES of a true and lively faith; and by them believers manifest their thankfulness, strengthen their assurance, edify their brethren, ..... that, having their fruit unto holiness, they may have the end, eternal life."

I know some people nowadays believe the Puritans went too far in this area but the things in my post are all in the WCF both in Chapter 16 which I quoted and in Chapter 18 which is on assurance and explains what I said more fully.

 

I wondered how the guys on here would handle this charge. The fact is, it is a weak point in Calvinism IF you are demanding a perfect logical consistency from a human standpoint. It can't be done. I do think that if the standard is what does the scripture say then God's sovereignty is solidly taught. I know John Owen, Charles Spurgeon, John MacArthur, and some of the current theologians admit this is hard to reconcile - the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man in light of this.

 

His By Grace--"John Gill: A Body of Doctrinal & Practical Divinity"-Doctrinal Book 2, Chapter 1
The decrees of God are always effectual; they cannot be frustrated or disannulled, or become of no effect; "For the Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? and his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?" #Isa 14:27. The purposes of men are often frustrated, through want of foresight, not being able to foresee what may turn up, which may hinder the execution of their designs; but no unforeseen accident can arise to put any stop in the way of executing the decrees of God; since all things are at once in his eternal view, who sees the end from the beginning: men sometimes fail of bringing their resolutions into execution, for want of power: but God is omnipotent, and is able to do, and therefore does whatever he pleases; he is in one mind, and none can turn him; and what he desires, he does; his counsel stands, and he does all his pleasure; and the thoughts of his heart are to all generations. To say no more; the end of the decrees of God is his own glory; he has "made", that is, appointed "all things for himself", for the glorifying his perfections, #Pr 16:4 there may be, and are, inferior ends, as the good of his creatures, &c. but his glory is the supreme end, and all others are subordinate to it.

His By Grace--"John Gill: A Body of Doctrinal & Practical Divinity"-Doctrinal Book 2, Chapter 2

There are many things objected to this doctrine of election; but since it is so clear and plain from scripture, and is written as with a sunbeam in it, all objections to it must be mere cavil. It is urged, that God is said to be "good to all, and his tender mercies over all his works", #Ps 145:9 which seems inconsistent with his choosing some and leaving others; but this is to be understood not of his special grace, but of his providential goodness, which extends to the elect and non-elect, the evil and the good, the just and the unjust, #Mt 5:45 and in this sense he is the saviour, preserver, and bountiful benefactor of all men, but especially of them that believe, #1Ti 4:10. It is observed that Christ says he was sent not to "condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved", and therefore not some only but all; but to understand this of all the individuals in the world is not true, because all are not saved; and so this end of Christ's mission, so understood, is not answered; but by the world is meant the world of God's elect, whom he was reconciling in Christ, and for whom Christ gave his life, and became the propitiation for their sins, even for all the chosen throughout the whole world, and particularly among the Gentiles. Nor is #1Ti 2:4 any objection to this doctrine, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth"; for all men are not eventually saved, nor do all come to the knowledge of the truth of the Gospel; nor indeed have all the means of that knowledge: but the sense is, either, that all that are saved, God wills to be saved; or that it is his will that men of all sorts and of all nations, Jews and Gentiles, should be saved; which agrees with the context, #1Ti 2:1,2,7. And when it is said of God, that he is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance", #2Pe 3:9 this must be interpreted, not of all mankind, but of the elect, to whom this and the preceding epistle are inscribed, and who are in #2Pe 3:8 styled "beloved", and in this verse, the "us" towards whom "God is longsuffering"; now it is the will and pleasure of God that none of those should perish, but all in due time be brought to faith in Christ, and to repentance towards God: but objections from hence, with others of the like kind, are not sufficient to overturn this truth, so abundantly established in the sacred scriptures.

 

"God's will determines all the choices and circumstances of his creatures, so that nothing is up to man's "free will." In fact, because God is completely sovereign, man has no free will:

All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. (Psalms 139:16)

The LORD works out everything for his own ends – even the wicked for a day of disaster. (Proverbs 16:4)

In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps. (Proverbs 16:9)

A man's steps are directed by the LORD. How then can anyone understand his own way? (Proverbs 20:24)

The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases. (Proverbs 21:1)

All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?" (Daniel 4:35)

Now listen, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money." Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, "If it is the Lord's will, we will live and do this or that." (James 4:13-15)

All things are decided and caused by God – nothing is free from his control, and he has not chosen to forego his control on anything. The doctrine is repulsive to those who abhor the rule and honor of God, and so they oppose it. But the doctrine is a source of comfort and celebration to those who love him. Why would we want it any other way, than for God to rule over all things? And what better life can we wish for, than to be ruled by God?

The doctrine contradicts the religious tradition that God does not decree evil or that he does not cause evil. Of course God does not make decrees against his other decrees. Since God is not insane, he has only one will, one desire. However, there is no problem for him to issue a decree that causes his creatures to violate his precepts. Whereas decrees are declarations of intentions about things that he would cause to happen, precepts are declarations of definitions, not intentions, and do not overlap with the decrees. It must be true that God decrees and causes events that are contrary to his precepts; otherwise, there could be no evil, but there is indeed evil. Therefore, God must be the metaphysical author of sin and evil.

This does not mean that God himself is evil. To metaphysically cause evil and to morally commit evil are two different things. One is a matter of ability to cause something, while the other is a matter of conformity to a principle. The Bible teaches that God is the one who defines right and wrong, and that sin is a transgression of God's law. Therefore, for God to commit evil by causing evil – for this to be bad or wrong – he must declare a moral law that forbids himself to decree or to cause evil, that is, to decree or to cause his creatures to transgress his law. There is no biblical basis to suppose that God has declared such a law against himself. Indeed, the Bible teaches that all that God says and does are right and good. If he says it, it must be true. If he does it, it must be good. Therefore, since God is sovereign and there is evil, God must be the cause of evil, and since he is the cause of evil, it must be right and good for him to be the cause of evil.

There is no divine law that says God would be wrong if he were to be the cause of evil. Why, then, do men assume that it would be evil for God to be the author of sin? What law would God transgress? He would transgress the law of men, or what men have imposed upon him to define what a righteous God must or must not do. This is the sinister truth behind the religious tradition that says God is not the author of sin, for if he were to be such, it would mean that he has transgressed a law that men has declared against him. The necessary conclusion is that the doctrine that God is not the author of sin, or that it is blasphemy and heresy to say that he is, is itself the real blasphemy and heresy. Unless God is the author of sin and evil, he is not completely sovereign, and he is not God. Therefore, to deny that God is the author of sin and evil is to deny God.

The Bible teaches that God's decrees and actions are always right and good. Since he is completely sovereign, and there is evil in this universe, this means that he is the one who decrees and causes evil in this universe. But since his decrees and actions are always right and good, then this means that it is right and good that he is the one who decrees and causes evil in this universe. The very fact that he decrees and causes evil means that it is right and good for him to do so.58 There is no authority or standard higher than God by which to condemn him. If he thinks that it is good for him to cause evil, then it is good for him to cause evil.

This does not mean that evil is good, which would be a contradiction. Sin is defined as a transgression of God's moral law, and when we say that God is the author of sin, we are saying that God is the metaphysical cause of a creature's transgression of God's moral law. God transgresses no moral law, since there is no moral law against what he does, but he causes the creature to transgress. Morality relates to moral law. But there is no moral law against sovereign metaphysical power. It is right and good for God to metaphysically cause evil, just because he does it, and because he has not declared himself wrong for doing it. It is wrong for man to morally commit evil, because God has declared man wrong for doing it, although it is God who metaphysically causes man to do it. Therefore, God remains righteous, and the sinner remains evil. The distinctions are clear. There is no paradox or contradiction, and also no biblical or logical basis for objection against the doctrine. It is because of God's absolute sovereignty that the existence of evil poses no challenge to the biblical worldview.

Does this make God a tyrant? If the word simply means, "an absolute ruler," then of course God is a tyrant. And since he is the sole moral authority, the very fact that he is a tyrant means that he ought to be one, that it is good and just for him to be one. The negative connotations of the word apply only to human beings, since no man is worthy of absolute authority or capable to wield it. But God is "an absolute ruler" – that is what it means to be God."

- Vincent Cheung, Systematic Theology

 

Because of their sin.

His By Grace--"John Gill: A Body of Doctrinal & Practical Divinity"-Doctrinal Book 2, Chapter 3

Whom God predestinates he justifies, by the righteousness of his Son. But are all men justified? No; for though he justifies some of all sorts and nations; as the circumcised Jews by faith, and the uncircumcised Gentiles through faith, yet not every individual; yea, there is a world that will be condemned, and consequently not predestinated to life, #1Co 11:32.

They that are chosen, are predestinated to the adoption of children, and enjoy both the grace and inheritance of children.

But are all children and heirs? is there not such a distinction among men, as children of God, and children of the devil; between whom there is, and will be, an eternal difference? #1Jo 3:10 and therefore there must be an election, and a non-election among them.

Moreover, whom God has predestinated, or chosen to life and happiness, these he glorifies, #Ro 8:30 they obtain the glory of Christ, which his Father has given him for them, and to which they are chosen and called, #Joh 17:22 2Th 2:13,14.

But are all glorified? do not some go into perdition, even into everlasting punishment? and therefore must be considered as non-elect, #Re 17:8 Mt 25:46.

To all which may be added, that those that are given to Christ, which is but another phrase for being chosen in him;

these, he says, shall come to him, and he will in no wise cast them out;

yea, that they are his sheep, whom he must bring to his Father, to himself, to his fold, to grace and glory, #Joh 6:37 10:16.

But are there not some whom Christ will drive away from him, and to then, say, "Depart from me, ye cursed into everlasting fire", #Mt 7:23 25:41.

All this put together most clearly and fully proves, that there are some who are not chosen of God, but rejected by him.

 

Remember, you are reasoning
with a mind affected by the fall,
which is so sin- cursed and blind
that you 'think' with it and say, "dead = dead". and yet they can sin. Lively corpse would you not agree.

 

You ignore what I posted and just repeat what you said before, do you think that will change anything?

The main idea Paul is putting across is this: If even a potter has the right out of the same lump or mass of clay to make one vessel for honor, and another for dishonor, then certainly God, our Maker, has the right, out of the same mass of human beings who by their own guilt have plunged themselves into the pit of misery, to elect some to everlasting life, and to allow others to remain in the abyss of wretchedness.

 

So BF you have finally stated the true you.
"God's will determines all the choices and circumstances of his creatures, so that nothing is up to man's "free will." In fact, because God is completely sovereign, man has no free will:

What you seem not to have grasped is that your view as stated makes God responsible for all that happens. You have just made God the biggest sinner in fact the only sinner. Man can do nothing unless God makes Him do it.

 

It is to bad that your view does not comport with the bible. That has been pointed out to you a number of times but you refuse to see it.

 

Never said man was sovereign but then again you do seem to have a problem with comprehension. Read the text BF. Try to that without the calvinist glasses.

 

Dave I agree it is hard to reconcile but they are true. God is sovereign and man is responsible. The hard part for some on here to accept is that for one to be held responsible they must have the ability to make real choices. Either good or bad, acceptance or rejection of Christ Jesus.

 

"Dead in trespasses and sins",
because they are Spiritually dead and still, physically, sinning, Brainchild.

 

Alan you refuse to see the flies in your soup. If the calvinist God determines all things then man has no option but to do as He [God] has determined him to do. So if God has determined him to sin he will sin not by choice but by compulsion. So we have your version of God causing the sin that He then condemns the man for. You have a strange view of the God of the bible.

 

Now now Alan no need to get upset and say nasty things. Perhaps you need to take a time out.

You still avoid the obvious problem of your theology. If your version of God determines all things then that means all things not some things as you seem to want. Either man has a free will or he does not. You seem to be having a problem grasping that fact.

 

All of Adam's Posterity sinned in Adam and left Spiritually dead and their 'ability to make real choices' is restricted to sin and no ability to Relate, Spiritually, to God, Who is Spirit, unless He Takes the Initiative.