Do some doctrines steal from the Glory of God?

[Skandelon]

Then why attribute a view to me that I do not hold? I also adhere to God's permissive will in regard to evil. I also do not see any conflict between God's permissive will in regard to evil and God's will of purpose to work all things for the ultimate good of his people (Rom. 8:28) and His own glory (Psa. 76:10).

Can you unpack what you mean by 'permissive will' a bit more. You may have answered this elsewhere (if so just say so and i'll find it). But many Calvinists have a deterministic take on their views of 'permissive' will and I'm not sure where you stand.

 

[The Biblicist]

Can you unpack what you mean by 'permissive will' a bit more. You may have answered this elsewhere (if so just say so and i'll find it). But many Calvinists have a deterministic take on their views of 'permissive' will and I'm not sure where you stand.

I use the term "permissive" will of God in connection with three Scriptural facts.

1. Evil does not have its source with the nature of God, as God does not delight in evil in regard to its inherent nature which is totally incompatible with the nature of God. Evil has its source with creatures who by purposeful design have responsible free agency which necessarily by its very design necessitates divine permission for ability to choose evil and thus evil has its immediate origin and author the responsible free will of God's creatures - "by one man sin entered the world and death by sin." Hence, it is a matter of necessary permission by the very nature of responsible free agency but in the face of express disapproval by God and thus by permission only.

2. In addition to the necessary permission of evil due to the design of responsible free will, the "permissive" will of God gives proper expression in regard to what evil God purposely allows versus what he purposely restrains (Psa. 76:10). He restrains all evil that does not serve His ultimate purpose. By contrast, He purposely permits that which will and does serve His ultimate purpose. So the term "permission" gives proper response to the antonym "restrain".

3. In addition to the above two facts, God delights in evil only as it pertains to his Justice, or its service as the penal consequences of sin and thus the righteous "wages of sin" and "as a man soweth that shall he also reap." Hence, all evil that actually does occur in time and space has been decreed by God within the boundaries of His just and holy purposes.

Thus, the term "permissive" infers that evil does not have its origin with the nature of God which is "without shadow of turning", that is, without any element of darkness but originates outside the nature of God with the will of responsible free agents in connection with the expressed disapproval by God but decreed as a necessary permission due to the inherent nature of responsible free agency. The unfallen free will of man is the author of sin in this world "by one man sin entered the world and death by sin" and the fallen will of man serves sin and is in bondage to "the law of sin."

 

[Skandelon]

I use the term "permissive" will of God in connection with three Scriptural facts.

1. Evil does not have its source with the nature of God, as God does not delight in evil in regard to its inherent nature which is totally incompatible with the nature of God. Evil has its source with creatures who by purposeful design have responsible free agency which necessarily by its very design necessitates divine permission for ability to choose evil and thus evil has its immediate origin and author the responsible free will of God's creatures - "by one man sin entered the world and death by sin." Hence, it is a matter of necessary permission by the very nature of responsible free agency but in the face of express disapproval by God and thus by permission only.

2. In addition to the necessary permission of evil due to the design of responsible free will, the "permissive" will of God gives proper expression in regard to what evil God purposely allows versus what he purposely restrains (Psa. 76:10). He restrains all evil that does not serve His ultimate purpose. By contrast, He purposely permits that which will and does serve His ultimate purpose. So the term "permission" gives proper response to the antonym "restrain".

3. In addition to the above two facts, God delights in evil only as it pertains to his Justice, or its service as the penal consequences of sin and thus the righteous "wages of sin" and "as a man soweth that shall he also reap." Hence, all evil that actually does occur in time and space has been decreed by God within the boundaries of His just and holy purposes.

Thus, the term "permissive" infers that evil does not have its origin with the nature of God which is "without shadow of turning", that is, without any element of darkness but originates outside the nature of God with the will of responsible free agents in connection with the expressed disapproval by God but decreed as a necessary permission due to the inherent nature of responsible free agency. The unfallen free will of man is the author of sin in this world and the fallen will of man serves the totally depraved heart as the consequence of the fall.

I find myself in agreement with most of everything you have written here, assuming I'm understanding you correctly (which may be a bold assumption given our history of misunderstanding )

I would only state that I don't believe evil actually serves God purposes because I don't believe evil HAS a purpose in and of itself. I believe God may allow evil FOR HIS purposes, but evil itself is just evil, it has no purpose. So, God permitting evil, not determining it, is purposeful. But the actual intent to do evil and the evil act itself is not God's purpose. However, God does work all things out for His good purpose, including evil things. Does that make sense? I'm not even sure that is in anyway disagreeing with what you have stated, but I just make that point of clarity because in the past I've had issues on this point with other Calvinistic types.

 

[The Biblicist]

I find myself in agreement with most of everything you have written here, assuming I'm understanding you correctly (which may be a bold assumption given our history of misunderstanding )

I would only state that I don't believe evil actually serves God purposes because I don't believe evil HAS a purpose in and of itself. I believe God may allow evil FOR HIS purposes, but evil itself is just evil, it has no purpose. So, God permitting evil, not determining it, is purposeful. But the actual intent to do evil and the evil act itself is not God's purpose. However, God does work all things out for His good purpose, including evil things. Does that make sense? I'm not even sure that is in anyway disagreeing with what you have stated, but I just make that point of clarity because in the past I've had issues on this point with other Calvinistic types.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::wavey: Since you quoted my post I edited the last sentence to read different than what you quoted.

 

[Skandelon]

I hate to ruin a good thing, because we finally found some common ground.

HOWEVER, a point I think we might disagree upon is regarding foreknowledge of evil. Does God foreknow what evil thing Dahmer will do because He sees Dahmer do it?

 

[The Biblicist]

I hate to ruin a good thing, because we finally found some common ground.

HOWEVER, a point I think we might disagree upon is regarding foreknowledge of evil. Does God foreknow what evil thing Dahmer will do because He sees Dahmer do it?

If evil is by permission then evil is by purpose or else it is not by permission. Thus Dahmer cannot do what God does not permit only what God purposed. So "foreknowledge" in regard to God's purpose simply refers to knowing all things because God purposed all that occurs. Note that foreknowledge follows purpose in Rom. 8:28-29. His permissive will is within His will of purpose and He works all things according to His purpose and that is why "we know" that "all things" including sin works ultmately for our good.

 

[Rippon]

God does work all things out for His good purpose, including evil things.

Of course. Remember what Joseph said? "Ye thought evil against me;but God meant it unto good..." (KJV)

Pharaoh was very evil,but God used the evil of that grand King to bring about His purposes.

The crucifixion of Christ was certainly most evil but used of God for good to be sure!

 

[Skandelon]

If evil is by permission then evil is by purpose or else it is not by permission. Thus Dahmer cannot do what God does not permit only what God purposed. So "foreknowledge" in regard to God's purpose simply refers to knowing all things because God purposed all that occurs. Note that foreknowledge follows purpose in Rom. 8:28-29. His permissive will is within His will of purpose and He works all things according to His purpose and that is why "we know" that "all things" including sin works ultmately for our good.

See, this is what I was referring to before. I think there is an important distinction between God purposing evil and God working out evil things for His purposes. Granted, some passages themselves may not spell out that distinction very clearly but other passages do spell out clearly that God is not the source or cause of evil or temptation to do evil. So, in order to reconcile those things we may understand some passages to mean that God 'permitted' evil so that His greater purpose is fulfilled, but stil never affirm that the evil itself was purposed, determined, caused or in any way originated in God's Holy nature or eternal will.

 

[Skandelon]

One more point. The very fact that one adopts the concept of God's permissive will, as I understand it, carries with it another very important logical necessity...which is that there are some things God does not permit.

That FACT itself validates the concept of human autonomy or 'free will,' for what is there for God to 'restrain' or 'not permit,' if man's will is not free?

 

[Rippon]

All Scripture Citations Are From The NIV

1 Sam. 14,15:"Now the Spirit of the Lord had departed from Saul,and an evil spirit from the Lord tormented him. Saul's attendants said to him,'See an evil spirit from God is tormenting you."

1 Samuel 18:10a:"The next day an evil spirit from God came forcefully on Saul."

Judges 9:23:"God stirred up animosity between Abimelek and the citizens of Shechem so that they acted treacherously against Abimelek."

Did God purpose,determine or cause evil in these cases --or did He merely allow?

 

[The Biblicist]

See, this is what I was referring to before. I think there is an important distinction between God purposing evil and God working out evil things for His purposes.

My response does not contradict this. I did not say evil originates with God's nature but with God's purpose in permitting only that evil consistent with His end game plan. In Romans 8 God's purpose precedes God's foreknowledge as His foreknowledge is merely the knowledge of all the details He has placed within the framework of His plan that determine how He will work all things for the good of His people.

 

[Skandelon]

My response does not contradict this.

Good to hear...just clarifying to be sure, as these words can be misleading at times. :thumbsup:

 

[Florida Believer]

Calvinism/Arminianism Debate

Of course Christ should get the glory, no matter what side of the fence you are on or believers like myself who hold to the fact that there are Twin Truths to this subject.

And there is permissive will and has been since Adam & Eve in the garden. They had not sinned yet, so the seed of sin was not in either of them yet. Satan tempted Eve 1st and God permitted her to fall for his deception, then Adam followed. And now we all have the sin nature from Adam's seed which happened after the disobedience.

What really gets me is the constant confusion created by those who say that man's acceptance of the free gift of salvation is a work. Obeying the call to salvation in Christ by free choice is hardly a work but rather is no different in obedience than Abraham and David who also were credited righteousness by their obedience in faith.

 

[Yeshua1]

Calvinists teach that God ordains whatsoever comes to pass for His greatest glory...

John Calvin wrote, "Hence we maintain that, by his providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined....Men do nothing save at the secret instigation of God, and do not discuss and deliberate on anything but what he has previously decreed with himself, and brings to pass by his secret direction."

John Piper echoes such teaching, "So when I say that everything that exists — including evil — is ordained by an infinitely holy and all-wise God to make the glory of Christ shine more brightly, I mean that, one way or the other, God sees to it that all things serve to glorify his Son.”
​

As evidenced on this forum and in other notable writings, Calvinists also teach that Arminian doctrine steals from the Glory of God, but isn't that a contradiction? Either God ordained Arminian doctrine (just as He does all things) for His greatest glory or the Arminian teachings steal from God's glory. It can't be both, can it?

How can one claim that God unchangeable ordained X for his greatest glory, while at the same time claiming that X lessens that glory?

Is this a Calvinistic contradiction?

Does God allow/permit for sinful persons to do what they desire to do, as their sin natures allow for them to be able to do?

yet still stay soveregn in all things ?

remember that paul stated that the Cross is glory of God, as his wisdom displayed for all to see, as he saves the lessor among us, yet allows the haughty and proud, and those relying upon vain philosophies and speculations go to their fall!