Proof of Calvinism

I whole-heartedly agree here.

 

In reviewing my post I criticized your view, not you. I see nothing ad hominem about it. It is your view that undermines God's omniscience and immutability. It is what you believe about God that I dissent.

This is where we parted company. I'm take this to mean that God does not know about anything until he creates it. This flies in the face of I John 3:20

What is the basis for your saying that God did not create the foreseen plan? This is confusing to me. You are ascribing to me something I do not believe. I certainly do believe God created out of nothing. I certainly believe the creation did not exist before God created it. I'm agreeing with you on this. Where am I wrong?

I do believe God knows the future exhaustively. I hold that the reason he does is that he has decreed it, and that he also knows all that would have come to pass if he had not prevented it. God's exhaustive foreknowledge flows from his purpose and plan

The main thing I questioned is your assertion that some things are unknowable to God. Now I'm not even sure you agree with yourself, given what you have written. I'd welcome any clarification.

 

From Van:

Ok, I retract stating that you holding to open theism, but only because your later post disagreeing with Open Theism showed that you do not.

Up to that point, the things you said do agree with open theism. You did not mention actions of free creatures, but you said God knows "part" of the future. If you get accused of being an open theist, it is because the things you are saying SOUND a lot like what open theists say.

So...Do you or do you not beleive God knows ALL the future?

This statement still does not make sense to me, but let me try a few questions to clarify:

1. If I find out yesterday that the road to my job is going to be closed today, and so I take a different route...is that foreknowledge?

2. What exactly did God foreknow in Rom. 8? What knowledge did God obtain in the past that he is now using in the present?

 

..Do you or do you not believe God knows ALL the future?

Now that is a wonderful question!! Based on how you framed it, you believe the future exists. Now does it exist in the spiritual realm on the other side of the veil of time? Is that what you believe God knows? How about what God has predetermined and predestined. Does God know that? Of course!!! He causes the future to conform to His purpose and plan.

There are two views of Omniscience, Total omniscience where God supposedly knows everything imaginable, and inherent omniscience where God knows everything He has chosen to know. This allows God to choose not to know something such as forgiving our sins and remembering them no more forever. Obviously Total omniscience is unbiblical or you believe God really does remember our sins but just says He does not.

I have carefully studied all the passages concerning our "all-knowing" God and have come to the conclusion that the Biblical view is inherent omniscience.

Calvinism is based in part on the unbiblical doctrine of total omniscience, but I have proved, to my satisfaction, that the doctrine is an invention of men based on shoddy bible study.

Calvinism is based on an erroneous view of the meaning of the Greek words translated foreknow and foreknowledge.
Calvinism is based on an erroneous view of the meaning of predestined to mean individuals chosen before creation.
Calvinism is based on an erroneous view of the meaning of justification where the supposedly preselected elect individuals were automatically justified when Christ's sacrifice was accepted.

Thus far, each and every Calvinist has utter failed to offer any biblical evidence for any of these doctrines: TULI. Instead we get words redefined to pour their invention into scripture, i.e. draw mean irresistible grace.

 

..... God supposedly knows?!?!?! :BangHead:

 

1. If I find out yesterday that the road to my job is going to be closed today, and so I take a different route...is that foreknowledge?

2. What exactly did God foreknow in Rom. 8? What knowledge did God obtain in the past that he is now using in the present?

Answer to question 1: Yes, that is exactly the meaning of foreknowing something. In eternity past God decided to redeem fallen men and chose as His redeemer, the Word. This is based on 1 Peter 1:19-20 where the Lamb was foreknown before the foundation of the world. Now when God chose His redeemer, His lamb, He formulated a redemption plan, for you do not choose a Redeemer without a plan to redeem! Therefore He chose us [corporately] in Him before the foundation of the world, Ephisians 1:4.

Answer to question 2: In Romans 8 it refers to knowing beforehand that people would be individually chosen and placed into the foreknown corporately elected group. So whom He foreknew refers to the corporated elected group, those His Redeemer would redeem. If you look back at verse 28, for whom He foreknew were those who were called [past tense] according to His purpose. Thus God knew in eternity past His redemption plan which included (1) calling people according to His purpose, and (2) the redemption plan included predestining those called according to His purpose, using the term called to refer not to those who hear the gospel with understanding, but uses the term called to refer to those whose faith God credited as righteousness.

In summary, in eternity past God chose His Redeemer and corporately chose us, those who would be redeemed, when He chose His Lamb. His redemption plan included that anyone called according to His purpose would be conformed to the image of His Son. Now when we are "called" using the term to refer to those chosen based on crediting their faith as righteousness, we are placed spiritually in Christ and undergo the circumcision of Christ where our body of sin is removed, and hence we are justified. And when we are transferred from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Son we are spiritually glorified.

 

That is a form of foreknowledge, but a poor shadow of God's foreknowledge.

God knew just everything because He designed and planned everything in eternity. God does not 'obtain' knowledge because there is nothing that He has not always known.

'....For I am God and there is no other; I am God and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, "My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure," Calling a bird of prey from the east, the man who executes My counsel from a far country. Indeed, I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it"' (Isaiah 47:9-11).

God does not just know there's a bird of prey coming, He called that very bird. He doesn't just know that Nebuchadnezzar or Cyrus is coming, He purposed and decreed that they would and organized the whole thing in eternity past.

God is just unbelievably great! :thumbs:

Steve

 

Van, are you saying that because God forgave Peter for his denial of Christ that he doesn't know about it? Are you saying we all know of Peter's denial but God doesn't? Doesn't this make God unaware of large portions of human history since much over the years has surely been forgiven?

Could it not be the phrase "remember them no more" simply connotes God's choice to forgiven and thus treat them as if it never happened?

 

The question really needs a yes or no and not some silly philosophical discussion about whether the future really exists.

 

Van stop trying to think too hard...you are going to hurt yourself;

:laugh::laugh::laugh::thumbs:

 

It seems that few Calvinists interpret 1 Sam. 16:14-15 because it does not fit with their view of the origin of evil.

 

So, if God in his great wisdom answered these questions in 'human' 'understandable terms' then why do intellectual theologians insist on answering the same questions using confounding complicated jargon that leads to confusing and disunity?

In other words, why not be okay with people believing in the terms God has chosen to reveal himself, rather than creating new ones which appear to be speculative and overreaching of the divine revelation?

And, I'm not so apposed with theological terms as much as I am finite logical conclusions some draw based upon those terms which are never spelled out in scripture.

 

What "few" Calvinists are your referring to? The Calvinists on this board or Calvinists throughout history? I hate to tell you this but there are more volumes written by Calvinist theologians on 1 Sam. 16:14-15 then Carter has little liver pills.

OK, so lets look at the passage:

1 Samuel 16:14-15 14 Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrorized him. 15 Saul's servants then said to him, "Behold now, an evil spirit from God is terrorizing you.

Did God actually send the evil spirit (demon) against Saul? Well, if this verse existed in a vacuum you may think so. But how do we balance 1 Sam. 16:14-15 against James 1:13-14?

James 1:13-14 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.

Are we to conclude that God contradicted Himself or that He is a liar? Or is it possible that there is another explanation? Could God have removed His restraining hand against evil and allowed a demonic force to have its way with Saul, much like God did with Job? There is precedent for this in Romans 1:

Romans 1:24 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.

God is not the author of evil. God is holy. However, God can use evil for His own purpose; a purpose that we can scarcely comprehend.

We have to be careful not to ascribe to God evil motives or intentions.

 

Herald, I'm not a Calvinist but I agree with this interpretation. However, I think the "issue" being questioned was the "spirit of the Lord departing" as it relates to the question of perseverance.

BTW, you are the "type" of Calvinist I can relate to...

 

Friend, thank you for your kind words. It's amazing how both sides can appreciate each other when the claws and fangs are retracted. That doesn't mean we agree; and it certainly doesn't preclude a good old theological donnybrook on occasion. But still, it's nice to actually reason with folks, isn't it?

 

Skan,

I think it is set up in a way that keeps us all searching scripture. Men through pride, or diffent levels of maturity, do not always agree. Some are just contentious no matter who teaches, they disagree.
Some have been trained in the GK/HEB.....so they see clearer than the untrained. Some do not read well. Some do not welcome biblical correction when it is offered....this happens alot.

 

I am interested in seeing how one would interpret John 6. Here is my explanation and use in defense of a teaching in line with Calvinism.

6:1-14 Jesus fed 5,000 men

6:26 People came back to him seeking more food.

6:27-Jesus rebuked them and told them to seek eternal food.

6:28-29- They asked what works they can do to do the work of God and Jesus instructed them to believe in Him.

6:30-33 They asked for a sign similar to the bread that was given to Moses from heaven. Jesus used that and replied that He was the bread that came down from heaven given them by God.

6:35- Jesus, in His own words instructed them to believe in Him.

6:36- Jesus rebuked them for their unbelief

6:37- Jesus then said that all the Father gives to Him will come emphasizing definite language based on God's giving over souls to pay for and save. Notice the ALL given by the Father and the WILL COME based on the GIVING OF THE FATHER.

6:38-39 Jesus has come to do the will of the Father which is for Him to accomplish the saving mission for the ones given to Him by His Father. He loses none of them and WILL raise them on the last day.

6:40- The ones who are given and Jesus are the ones who come to Him through faith as the passage teaches (verse 6:28-29, 35)

6:41-42. The people were still stuck on Jesus' claim that He came from heaven and simply thought He was crazy because they knew Joseph.

6:43-44 Jesus told them to stop grumbling and that none (no one) could come to Him in faith unless they had been chosen or given to Jesus by the Father (a prerequisite to faith or "to come").

Note: Now remember verses 35-40 where ALL who are given to Jesus by the Father through faith WILL come to Him and WILL be rasied in the final resurrection. Verse 44 is not mere language that explains that the Holy Spirit must work as both Cals and Non Cals believe but rather is a definite work based on the Father's giving to the Son.

6:45- All the elect or in Jesus terms those given Him by the Father will be taught by God. Jesus probably quoted Is. 54:13 and or Jer. 31:34 in prophesy of the new Covenant people who God purchases with His own ransom and lavishes blessings upon such as a new spirit, His Spirit, forgiveness of sin, and so forth.

6:47-51- restatement of Jesus' point that He is the bread out of heaven (the sign and Messiah of God) and anyone who comes to Him will be saved having eternal life.

 

I agree, but what's a donnybrook? Some kind of fight, I suppose.

 

David, that's exactly what it is.