His determinate counsel

So you have God decreeing, knowing absolutely nothing till after His decree.
OR
You have God determining what every single act that is to come to pass. If THIS be true then God is the reason people rape, mutilate, lie, in short - sin. God determined the exact sin they will do and it pleased Him to do it for it IS the Will of God.

If I'm incorrect, please elaborate where I missed something.

God decrees in conjuction WITH His knowledge NOT due it.
Beyond that there is nothing in scripture.

Now here is the problem James with both yours and my view. We do not know what God actually knows because we don't know how God actaully thinks. So much of your view is based upon pure conjecture, which sadly is the basis of a large portion of your theology. My theology is the same predicimate, though a much smaller portion is affected since the Non-Cal theology isn't based so much upon the premise of the why's and how's of Gods decrees, but on the fact that Gods decrees work in conjuction with His knowledge.

In short:
You say God's decree gives Him knowledge.
We say God's decree is in conjuction WITH His knowledge

 

While I do not ascribe to irresistable Grace nor do I ascribe the the false doctrine that God made some men for the sole purpose to damn which cannot be found in scripture I have been influenced by the reformed theology.

By this I mean that when I look at any doctriine I measure it against God's Soveriegnty. I believe many false views fail in this area.


What many false doctrines are borne out of ( an this will upset folks on both sides of the isle) is the false ideology of what constitutes works. If we take a look at John 1:12,13 we see a need for repsonse from man and a soveriegn act of God. Trying to dissiminate this dichotomy creates many arguments and false teachings.

Whether God requires any amount of response from man has no bearing on a works based salvation or an infringement on God's soveriegnty. The credit for salvation both begins and ends with Christ and the cross. What I find in many conversations is that on one side of the isle v. 12 has more focus and bearing on their thoughts and the opposite is true on the other side of the isle. Niether should bear anymore weight or focus than the other.

The biblical notion of a works based salvation is found in those who were lost who wanted to justify themselves based on their own efforts of keeping the law. To make an attempt to equate this with responding to God's call to Himself is a false comparison. When men who's hearts have been opened up by God move toward God as a result of the work of the Holy Ghost the men credit for that move. When that open heart realizes that because of the work of Christ on the cross he can now kneel and lay his sins at the foot of the cross that move forward cannot be seen as a work of man in salvtion but only a repsonse to the already completed work of Christ. Response does not equal a work.

What we can agree on is that God is the intitiator, the persuer of man. Man cannot come to God on his own. The debate comes alive when we try to determine does God open up man's heart to Him and then allow him to accept or reject Him?

To say no puts God in a place of force which is antithetical to any sense of the word love. Love can never be forced on someone. Without a choice there is no love. And God does want and expect love from us. Jesus said that those who love him should will keep His commandments (John 14:15). Here the option of not loving is open to the hearers. Johm did not write in 1 John 4:19 that we love God because He forced on us love. But what he did write is that we love God because He first loved is. Here is yet another passage of scripture showing that the relationship between man and God is one that God initiates and man repsonds by choice.

If God just forced salvation on men and love would it not be perfect and without error? Would there be a need to grow? Or is this forced love lacking because it is incomplete? That would be quite an indictment against God.

The truth is in all of our interactions with God He is both capable and desirous that He should open our hearts so that we may respond to Him not because he is inhibited, held back, beholden to or in any limited by our actions. But because that is the nature of His love for us.

 

And would God planting that tree in the garden mean He didn't love Adam? Why'd He warn Adam?

Telling your girls not to play in the street is NOT the same as not providing them the choice. Your girls chose for themselves to obey you, but you only provided guidance in their place to play. NOT the same thing unless you put up a 10 foot fence with barbed wire at the top and bottom and chained their hands to keep them in.

As I see it, God is outside of time. I also believe that He can chose and event and see all the possibilities that will come about as a result of that event. I also believe that He can manipulate the possibilities to get the outcome that He desires. I don't believe man can come close to understanding how God does this, which is why we argue over it.

 

2 Tim: seems to me that you're simply recognizing the tension between God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. The ancient philosophers recoginzed this tension as blind determinism (fate) vs self-determination (free will). But they did not use the Bible to guide them. The system we now call "calvinism" IS the solution to the tension. "Compatiblism" is a main feature of Calvinism (but not some forms of hyper-C). The only answer to how things come about is the decree of an all-knowing, all-wise God. God has decreed evil to exist but has not caused sin. And although He did not cause sin, he nevertheless uses it to carry out His decree. This is the resolution to the paradox.

The free will system can not resolve the paradox. It can not maintain God's sovereignty, no matter how many times freewill preachers claim to believe in God's sovereignty.

 

Again it is a false argument to assert that God's soveriegnty is infringed upon if He gives man the choice after opening up man's heart. The only real debate with any honesty is which method did god choose. Not is God's soveriegnty infringed on.

 

To this I disagree. The only answer to how things come about is we can only guess how these things come about while here on earth, but we will never know this side of Heaven.

 

Webdog,

The Bible begins with God not man. To be honest, I find your objection disturbing. God is at the center not man.

 

TCG, I don't even think you read what I responded to. I have no clue how you came to the conclusion you did

 

1. Here's the quote you responded to: "The only answer to how things come about is the decree of an all-knowing, all-wise God."

2. And then I responded.

 

My reply was in regards to....how these "things come about" from the entire quote.

 

Anyone reading your reply would never have gotten that, unless you had made it clear.

 

Granted. Going back and reading that I can see that. Thanks for helping me to clarify my thoughts.

 

No probs! I was only responding to what I read. :thumbs:

 

1. I'm not sure if I made myself clear.
2. I'm not sure if your comment was based on a misunderstanding of what I said.
3. Are you saying that you believe that there are things that were not decreed by God? That some things happen by blind chance?

 

It depends on your use of "decree". You stated calvinism is the answer, and many of the tenents of decreeism within that I do not believe are Scripturally supported.