Reformed Theology vs. the Reformed Attitude

[glfredrick]

Yes, "why? why? why?" didn't you answer Skan's question?


And "why?" did God choose you and not the other guy?

Your response sounds like you have serious doubts as to God's actions... Isn't that an area that could get you in trouble with the Lord?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Your response sounds like you have serious doubts as to God's actions... Isn't that an area that could get you in trouble with the Lord?

I would have just answered the question as "Yes" & let it go at that....let your yes be yes & your no be no.

 

[webdog]

Your response sounds like you have serious doubts as to God's actions... Isn't that an area that could get you in trouble with the Lord?

Her response was based on another poster's who used such posting etiquette...does your question still stand for him as well?

 

[glfredrick]

Her response was based on another poster's who used such posting etiquette...does your question still stand for him as well?

The question stands for anyone who would wonder/doubt/be upset by the choices that our Almighty and Sovereign God might or did make.

Clear enough?

Who are we to question God? Not that we don't do it, or not even that we cannot find examples of those sort of questions in Scripture -- we can -- but at the end of the day, we either totally agree with God or we remain in our rebellion and are lost.

I find this issue at the heart of the Arminian/Calvinist debate.

 

[preacher4truth]

The question stands for anyone who would wonder/doubt/be upset by the choices that our Almighty and Sovereign God might or did make.

Clear enough?

Who are we to question God? Not that we don't do it, or not even that we cannot find examples of those sort of questions in Scripture -- we can -- but at the end of the day, we either totally agree with God or we remain in our rebellion and are lost.

I find this issue at the heart of the Arminian/Calvinist debate.

You're exactly correct. An underlying premise to this is that "if God does this, then it is not fair," so men cast it out as error. Most of this is simply cultural conditioning of thought; the traditional acceptance of mans freewill, mans freedom, and glorifcation of man in humanistic thought.

The bottom line in this is since God does know all things, has permitted all things, and Sovereignly rules all things to the end that all His purpose will culminate, even in His choosing whom He wills, do we want to know God as He is, and do we then ultimately trust Him and praise Him as God Almighty. To me all these things make God to me an Awesome (standing in literal awe of Him) and Holy God beyond being worthy of Praise.

This always does remind me of Moses in Exodus 33, where after he had seen the judgments and severity of God, and also seeing His grace, he then stood in awe, and said "I want to know your ways." That is truly trusting Him and knowing Him.

- Peace

 

[webdog]

The question stands for anyone who would wonder/doubt/be upset by the choices that our Almighty and Sovereign God might or did make.

Clear enough?

Who are we to question God? Not that we don't do it, or not even that we cannot find examples of those sort of questions in Scripture -- we can -- but at the end of the day, we either totally agree with God or we remain in our rebellion and are lost.

I find this issue at the heart of the Arminian/Calvinist debate.

Where do you base we can "get in trouble with the Lord" for questioning / wondering / doubting? Was He not the one to say "let US reason together"?

I wonder plenty about circumstances and things that happen which either God has allowed or directly caused...and I am not in rebellion to God for doing so...nor am I lost.

 

[JesusFan]

The question stands for anyone who would wonder/doubt/be upset by the choices that our Almighty and Sovereign God might or did make.

Clear enough?

Who are we to question God? Not that we don't do it, or not even that we cannot find examples of those sort of questions in Scripture -- we can -- but at the end of the day, we either totally agree with God or we remain in our rebellion and are lost.

I find this issue at the heart of the Arminian/Calvinist debate.

really all boils down to this...

Do we REALLY believe that God is in control, that He ALONE has "ultimate" free will?

or do we have the means by our 'free wills" to stop God?
that we have to stay in control regardless?

 

[mandym]

really all boils down to this...

Do we REALLY believe that God is in control, that He ALONE has "ultimate" free will?

or do we have the means by our 'free wills" to stop God?
that we have to stay in control regardless?

It doesn't boil down to that at all. In fact such a notion limits God sovereignty to your box. This reminds me of Job's friends who tried to put God in a limited box. they found out real quick that they had no business trying to do that.

 

[preacher4truth]

Where do you base we can "get in trouble with the Lord" for questioning / wondering / doubting? Was He not the one to say "let US reason together"?

I wonder plenty about circumstances and things that happen which either God has allowed or directly caused...and I am not in rebellion to God for doing so...nor am I lost.

First, Isaiah 1:18 is not a proof-text for "questioning the Potter" which is the context of what glfrederick is arguing. This is not what "reason together" means at all.

Of course all people have questioned God at times. This is not what glfrederick is arguing at all and I'm pretty certain you are aware of this, but if not, take note that it is not about questioning Him in general, it's about indicting He and His choices as wrong and unfair. Basically it boils down to whether we really trust Him in His Sovereign control, choosing, and desires, over and above what man thinks, since His thoughts and knowledge are infinitely above ours.

Also, the context of Isaiah 1:18 is not God calling us into debate with Him, as you suggest is the meaning, giving you a proof text. Rather it is God saying "Let us be correct together in relationship." It has nothing to do with what you are attempting to make it mean whatsoever.

- Peace

 

[Aaron]

You're exactly correct. An underlying premise to this is that "if God does this, then it is not fair," so men cast it out as error.

This is the heart of the issue. God does not conform to the Noncalvinist's carnal sense of justice. Their impetus is the desire to make Him do so. They believe men would accept Him if they could see that God really does think like men, and that everything He has done is exactly how they would have done it as men.

 

[mandym]

This is the heart of the issue. God does not conform to the Noncalvinist's carnal sense of justice. Their impetus is the desire to make Him do so. They believe men would accept Him if they could see that God really does think like men, and that everything He has done is exactly how they would have done it as men.

Be careful of broad brushes

 

[preacher4truth]

This is the heart of the issue. God does not conform to the Noncalvinist's carnal sense of justice. Their impetus is the desire to make Him do so. They believe men would accept Him if they could see that God really does think like men, and that everything He has done is exactly how they would have done it as men.

Yes, it is the heart of the issue. I agree. Man thinks that God must fit into his reason and intellect. If not, how could He ever be God?

But at the same time, these would agree that He is infinitely beyond reason.

Go figure.

 

[glfredrick]

Be careful of broad brushes

Typically, I might side with you concerning the "broad brush" comment, but in this case your concern is totally misplaced. We cannot and must not paint Holy God in any other fashion than was so eloquently painted by Aaron.

Do you not fear God in the biblical sense? Have you elevated humanity above the throne of God?

 

[glfredrick]

First, Isaiah 1:18 is not a proof-text for "questioning the Potter" which is the context of what glfrederick is arguing. This is not what "reason together" means at all.

Of course all people have questioned God at times. This is not what glfrederick is arguing at all and I'm pretty certain you are aware of this, but if not, take note that it is not about questioning Him in general, it's about indicting He and His choices as wrong and unfair. Basically it boils down to whether we really trust Him in His Sovereign control, choosing, and desires, over and above what man thinks, since His thoughts and knowledge are infinitely above ours.

Also, the context of Isaiah 1:18 is not God calling us into debate with Him, as you suggest is the meaning, giving you a proof text. Rather it is God saying "Let us be correct together in relationship." It has nothing to do with what you are attempting to make it mean whatsoever.

- Peace

Exactly... And why I mentioned that questioning God is plainly evident in Scripture.

 

[Skandelon]

Originally Posted by preacher4truth
You're exactly correct. An underlying premise to this is that "if God does this, then it is not fair," so men cast it out as error.

That may be some people's "underlying premise," but it's not mine. As I've said before, "The wonder of God's mercy and grace is NOT that He doesn't save everyone; it is that He even saves ANYONE!"

This is the very essence of what I believe, even as a non-Calvinist. God is not in any way morally obligated to save anyone because we deserve it. Again, this is a point upon which we can all agree.

However, God has obligated Himself, both morally and judicially, to save whosoever will come (believe). Not because they deserve it, but because He sent forth His Son to be a propitiation for sins of whole world, which is to be applied only through faith. His universal call to "every creature" to faith and repentance obligates him to save whosoever repents and believes. The doctrine that teaches that God only grants this ability to willingly repent and believe to a select few while appearing to call "every creature" is what causes the non-Calvinists to cry, "Foul!"

I don't believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because he condemns certain people to hell. I believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because He offers a pardon to all mankind while only granted a few of them the ability to receive it, all the while expressing a desire for all to come to repentance and a frustration for those who remain unwilling.

It is deceptive to offer someone a gift you fully know they cannot willingly receive. Especially if you, the giver, are the one who determines the receivers natural abilities. That type of offer cannot be genuine!"

This is the heart of the issue. God does not conform to the Noncalvinist's carnal sense of justice.

Our understanding and belief of what is just is only "carnal" if its untrue and it certainly wouldn't be anything God would have to conform to as the author of it, thus this statement begs the question and thus serves no other purpose but to inflame.

Their impetus is the desire to make Him do so.

More of the same...

 

[quantumfaith]

That may be some people's "underlying premise," but it's not mine. As I've said before, "The wonder of God's mercy and grace is NOT that He doesn't save everyone; it is that He even saves ANYONE!"

This is the very essence of what I believe, even as a non-Calvinist. God is not in any way morally obligated to save anyone because we deserve it. Again, this is a point upon which we can all agree.

However, God has obligated Himself, both morally and judicially, to save whosoever will come (believe). Not because they deserve it, but because He sent forth His Son to be a propitiation for sins of whole world, which is to be applied only through faith. His universal call to "every creature" to faith and repentance obligates him to save whosoever repents and believes. The doctrine that teaches that God only grants this ability to willingly repent and believe to a select few while appearing to call "every creature" is what causes the non-Calvinists to cry, "Foul!"

I don't believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because he condemns certain people to hell. I believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because He offers a pardon to all mankind while only granted a few of them the ability to receive it, all the while expressing a desire for all to come to repentance and a frustration for those who remain unwilling.

It is deceptive to offer someone a gift you fully know they cannot willingly receive. Especially if you, the giver, are the one who determines the receivers natural abilities. That type of offer cannot be genuine!"

Our understanding and belief of what is just is only "carnal" if its untrue and it certainly wouldn't be anything God would have to conform to as the author of it, thus this statement begs the question and thus serves no other purpose but to inflame.

More of the same...

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

I will go so far as to say I don't think ANYONE that I have ever witnessed on BB "goes into this error of thinking God is not fair". But the scriptures do in fact teach God is Just and it is certainly reasonable to assume that this is an important attribute of God.

 

[preacher4truth]

That may be some people's "underlying premise," but it's not mine. As I've said before, "The wonder of God's mercy and grace is NOT that He doesn't save everyone; it is that He even saves ANYONE!"

This is the very essence of what I believe, even as a non-Calvinist. God is not in any way morally obligated to save anyone because we deserve it. Again, this is a point upon which we can all agree.

However, God has obligated Himself, both morally and judicially, to save whosoever will come (believe). Not because they deserve it[/U

Above is your response to:

You're exactly correct. An underlying premise to this is that "if God does this, then it is not fair," so men cast it out as error.

This may not be an underlying premise with you, then it doesn't apply to you, but it does apply to a vast amount of believers.

Only those who believe are the elect. Which of any saved are non-elect?

It's true it's not because we deserve it, that is why we call it unconditional. The call is unconditional.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

That may be some people's "underlying premise," but it's not mine. As I've said before, "The wonder of God's mercy and grace is NOT that He doesn't save everyone; it is that He even saves ANYONE!"

Well you got that part right.....HE IS MERCIFUL

This is the very essence of what I believe, even as a non-Calvinist. God is not in any way morally obligated to save anyone because we deserve it. Again, this is a point upon which we can all agree.

SO FAR SO GOOD!

However, God has obligated Himself, both morally and judicially, to save whosoever will come (believe). Not because they deserve it, but because He sent forth His Son to be a propitiation for sins of whole world, which is to be applied only through faith. His universal call to "every creature" to faith and repentance obligates him to save whosoever repents and believes. The doctrine that teaches that God only grants this ability to willingly repent and believe to a select few while appearing to call "every creature" is what causes the non-Calvinists to cry, "Foul!"

Aaron is right.....this is where you apply your man made thinking to a "Just & Holy God" Have you read Ephesians chapter one? It plainly teaches that before the foundation of the world, God, according to His own sovereign pleasure, elected a people to eternal salvation and made all of the arrangements necessary for them to live with Him in glory .

I don't believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust

That because he condemns certain people to hell.

Wow, that would be blasphemy right there brother, Right, nobody says God is unjust

Jesus did not die for the whole human race & its not supported in scripture. Jesus said He came into the world to do the will of His Father, and that will was that He should save all who were given Him (the elect) even before the world began (John 6: 37-39). Jesus came to save HIS PEOPLE from their sins, and He did it (Matt. 1: 21; Rom. 8: 33, 34). He died for His sheep, not for goats (John 10: 15). He died for sons, for the sanctified, for the brethren, for the church, and for the children (Heb. 2: 9-15). He saw the travail of His soul and was satisfied (Isa. 53: 10-12) .


I believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because He offers a pardon to all mankind while only granted a few of them the ability to receive it, all the while expressing a desire for all to come to repentance and a frustration for those who remain unwilling.

What!?! Your misrepresenting us....thats why your all turned around! Did Christ died for all of mankind? No, we believe that the world for which He died was the world of His elect. The world of souls for which He died do not have their trespasses imputed to them and therefore cannot be condemned (2 Cor. 5: 18-19).

Also since we are on the subject of justice, this is taken from a PB Q&A. We Primitives are very close in our beliefs to the Calvinists though we ARE NOT Calvinists, we share in the belief of Doctrines of Grace

Do you not then teach that some might want salvation but could not have it because they are not one of the elect?

Answer: No, the man who wants salvation already HAS it. The man who hungers and thirsts (desires it) after righteousness is a blessed character (Matt. 5: 2-6). The alien sinner doesn't want salvation, he doesn't fear God, and he doesn't love God; therefore we conclude that the man who wants salvation, fears God and loves God is a subject of grace (Rom. 3: 11, 18; I John 4: 10) .


So we are all happy happy now?

 

[Aaron]

Be careful of broad brushes

It's the brush the Spirit uses: Thou wilt say unto me, why doth He yet find fault? It's a questioning of God's justice. Men need to be reminded that they are but men. Nay, but, O man, who art thou?

It doesn't matter how one slices the debate, it boils down to this, men believe God is like them, or that they are like God.

 

[preacher4truth]

Also since we are on the subject of justice, this is taken from a PB Q&A. We Primitives are very close in our beliefs to the Calvinists though we ARE NOT Calvinists, we share in the belief of Doctrines of Grace

Do you not then teach that some might want salvation but could not have it because they are not one of the elect?

Answer: No, the man who wants salvation already HAS it. The man who hungers and thirsts (desires it) after righteousness is a blessed character (Matt. 5: 2-6). The alien sinner doesn't want salvation, he doesn't fear God, and he doesn't love God; therefore we conclude that the man who wants salvation, fears God and loves God is a subject of grace (Rom. 3: 11, 18; I John 4: 10) .


So we are all happy happy now?

Heavens sakes, "happy happy!!???" No way, someone somewhere is mad that someone else on the internet is just plain wrong!!! :laugh: :laugh: :thumbsup: