The Closed Theism of Calvinism

[jbh28]

If God predestines everything, then God is the author of sin.

Not true, but you'll probably continue to say it anyway. I have given what it means, but you continue to ignore that. How come you never address that? or do you just like sticking with your straw man?

 

[jbh28]

Actually, I believe Jbh said that he believes God does predestine everything, but he includes within his understanding of "predestine" the concept of foreknowledge of evil and permission/allowing it to occur, rather than an active determination of God. A few others have affirmed this position (but maybe not on this thread).

exactly. God works everything after the council of his will. We also have choices. I don't understand fully how the two work together other than God allowing us to make choices and still accomplishing his will.

 

[Van]

More evasion, shifting the topic to my character and qualifications. We have 23 pages of it.

Does God predestine everything, closed theism, or does God not predestine everything partially open theism. Not one Calvinist will answer this question directly. Not one.

 

[Skandelon]

More evasion, shifting the topic to my character and qualifications. We have 23 pages of it.

Van, you know I'm more in line with your views than most on this thread, but being objective here, I'm not seeing evasion or any character/qualification attacks now. What I see is two people talking past each other instead of addressing actual points of contention.

I think we would get more to the heart of the matter if you would affirm or deny Jhb's explanation of God's permissive decrees (that which God foreknows and permits vs. that which he actively decrees) and why.

 

[jbh28]

More evasion, shifting the topic to my character and qualifications. We have 23 pages of it.

Does God predestine everything, closed theism, or does God not predestine everything partially open theism. Not one Calvinist will answer this question directly. Not one.

False Dichotomy. Stop whining about your character and start addressing counter arguments. You have a false view of predestining all things(which I have given) yet you say no one has answered.

 

[Winman]

Your denial won't work. God told David Saul would go to Keilah. That permits only two possibilities;

#1 God lied

#2 God FOREKNEW Saul would go down and told the truth. And if he foreknew it, then it was predestined that Saul would go down.

If #2 is true, then God had to intervene to change his own decree.

You will not admit it, but these are the only possibilities available to you.

 

[DHK]

More evasion, shifting the topic to my character and qualifications. We have 23 pages of it.

Does God predestine everything, closed theism, or does God not predestine everything partially open theism. Not one Calvinist will answer this question directly. Not one.

That depends on the Calvinist your talking to and how he defines his terms. Luke for example, would answer yes to your first question, but when asked to define certain terms by Skan, would not qualify them any certainty. With him everything was predetermined, in effect (as far as I could see it, and taking it to its only logical conclusion) making God the author of sin.
But not every Calvinist goes that far.

Predestination is taught in the Bible. We can't avoid it.
It seems to me that predestination targets the believers. We are the ones chosen to be "to the praise of his glory;" chosen "to be conformed to his image;" chosen to be "a light to the Gentiles," etc. Election is directed to the believer. But it does not negate free will.

 

[Skandelon]

You have a false view of predestining all things(which I have given) yet you say no one has answered.

Jbh, the problem with your definition of "predestination" is that it allows for God's permissively or actively decreeing your salvation, which doesn't bring much clarity to our point of contention. Make sense?

 

[jbh28]

Your denial won't work. God told David Saul would go to Keilah. That permits only two possibilities;

#1 God lied

No

#2 God FOREKNEW Saul would go down and told the truth. And if he foreknew it, then it was predestined that Saul would go down.

If #2 is true, then God had to intervene to change his own decree.

No, It wasn't predestined if it didn't happen. You are equating God's knowledge of possible events with predestination which isn't true.

You will not admit it, but these are the only possibilities available to you.

Since I have given another, sorry but no. But nice example of a false dichotomy. why don't you address my argument instead.

 

[jbh28]

Jbh, the problem with your definition of "predestination" is that it allows for God's permissively or actively decreeing your salvation, which doesn't bring much clarity to our point of contention. Make sense?

Of course, that's not the topic of discussion here.

 

[Winman]

No

What a compelling argument you present.

No, It wasn't predestined if it didn't happen. You are equating God's knowledge of possible events with predestination which isn't true.

I have been debating you Calvinists for almost two years now, and I have a good grasp of what you believe. Calvinists believe God can only foreknow what he decreed to come to pass.

Well, there is your problem. God told David that Saul would come to Keilah. You have two possibilities here:

#1 That God lied or was mistaken. I am sure we both deny this as God can never lie or make an error.

#2 God foresaw that Saul would come to Keilah and told David the truth. But if God can only foreknow what he has decreed, then he must have decreed that Saul would come to Keilah. You can deny and wiggle all you want, this is what your doctrine demands. Otherwise, the only other option is that God lied to David or was mistaken which is impossible.

You try to distract by arguing Saul never came to Keilah so this proves it was not predestined or decreed. But this does not negate the fact that God told David that Saul would come to Keilah. God didn't say "if", he didn't say "perhaps", he didn't say "maybe", he said Saul would come to Keilah. So, you are still stuck with either believeing God was lying or mistaken, or that he was telling David the truth and had seen in his foreknowledge that Saul would come to Keilah. And if God can only foresee what he has decreed, then he decreed Saul would come to Keilah.

But Saul did not.

Since I have given another, sorry but no. But nice example of a false dichotomy. why don't you address my argument instead.

There's nothing false about this. If the Calvinist view that God can only foreknow what he has decreed is true, then God either lied to David or was mistaken, or else he intervened to prevent his own decree from coming to pass (and in time if I might add).

You will simply deny, but this passage proves the Calvinist doctrine of foreknowledge to be error.

 

[jbh28]

What a compelling argument you present.



I have been debating you Calvinists for almost two years now, and I have a good grasp of what you believe. Calvinists believe God can only foreknow what he decreed to come to pass.

Let me give you a lesson on Calvinism that you might not have realized yet but should have. We don't all agree on everything.

Well, there is your problem. God told David that Saul would come to Keilah. You have two possibilities here:

#1 That God lied or was mistaken. I am sure we both deny this as God can never lie or make an error.

Which I agree with you before on. that was my first "no." I was agreeing with you.

#2 God foresaw that Saul would come to Keilah and told David the truth. But if God can only foreknow what he has decreed, then he must have decreed that Saul would come to Keilah. You can deny and wiggle all you want, this is what your doctrine demands. Otherwise, the only other option is that God lied to David or was mistaken which is impossible.

You are equating "foreknow" of a possibility, with decreed. No body would do that, not even any Calvinist. Also, "doctrine demans" just stop that. Address my points please and not what you think a Calvinist believes as we all differ on many specific points. It's like someone debating you on baptist doctrine but ignoring your points and just arguing against points of some other baptist he may know.

You try to distract by arguing Saul never came to Keilah so this proves it was not predestined or decreed.

That's right. If it didn't happen, obviously it wasn't decreed to happen

But this does not negate the fact that God told David that Saul would come to Keilah. God didn't say "if", he didn't say "perhaps", he didn't say "maybe", he said Saul would come to Keilah. So, you are still stuck with either believeing God was lying or mistaken, or that he was telling David the truth and had seen in his foreknowledge that Saul would come to Keilah. And if God can only foresee what he has decreed, then he decreed Saul would come to Keilah.

Was God's foreknowledge mistaken?

There's nothing false about this. If the Calvinist view that God can only foreknow what he has decreed is true, then God either lied to David or was mistaken, or else he intervened to prevent his own decree from coming to pass (and in time if I might add).

You will simply deny, but this passage proves the Calvinist doctrine of foreknowledge to be error.

just stop the straw man.

 

[Winman]

You are equating "foreknow" of a possibility, with decreed. No body would do that, not even any Calvinist. Also, "doctrine demans" just stop that. Address my points please and not what you think a Calvinist believes as we all differ on many specific points. It's like someone debating you on baptist doctrine but ignoring your points and just arguing against points of some other baptist he may know.

You have just jumped from the pan into the fire. If God foreknows all possibilities, then it is impossible that God can only foreknow what he has decreed. Can God foresee a thousand possibilies and decree them all?

My point is that saying that God can only foresee what he has decreed is false. It must be. I do not believe God was speaking of Saul possibly coming down to Keilah. If David had remained in Keilah, then Saul would have certainly come down, and the men of the city would have turned David over to Saul. God was not guessing here, he was stating this as an absolute fact.

But the fact that David fled and Saul decided not to come to Keilah proves that God's foreknowledge was not based on a decree.

 

[jbh28]

You have just jumped from the pan into the fire. If God foreknows all possibilities, then it is impossible that God can only foreknow what he has decreed. Can God foresee a thousand possibilies and decree them all?

No, all that happens is decreed(whether active or allowance). God knows all things including all possibilities. (like your story you quoted.) God warned because he knew what would happen.

My point is that saying that God can only foresee what he has decreed is false. It must be.

If you mean foresee actual event, then it's true. If you mean possibilities, then no. It depends on your definition.

I do not believe God was speaking of Saul possibly coming down to Keilah. If David had remained in Keilah, then Saul would have certainly come down, and the men of the city would have turned David over to Saul. God was not guessing here, he was stating this as an absolute fact.

But the fact that David fled and Saul decided not to come to Keilah proves that God's foreknowledge was not based on a decree.

foreknowledge of a possible(but not actual) event has nothing to do with decree because the event never happened. God foreseeing an actual event would equal a decree(whether by allowing or active)

 

[Winman]

No, all that happens is decreed(whether active or allowance). God knows all things including all possibilities. (like your story you quoted.) God warned because he knew what would happen.


If you mean foresee actual event, then it's true. If you mean possibilities, then no. It depends on your definition.

foreknowledge of a possible(but not actual) event has nothing to do with decree because the event never happened. God foreseeing an actual event would equal a decree(whether by allowing or active)

This is just double-talk. If God can only forsee what he has decreed, and everything he decrees must come to pass, there are no such things as other possibilities. That is logically impossible.

This passage refutes this. God could clearly see what would have happened if David remained in Keilah. But it did not come to pass, which proves God's foreknowledge is not limited to what he has decreed.

I will not keep arguing with you, I think I have presented a sound and logical argument. It seems to me that you simply refuse to believe anything that would contradict your cherished doctrine, even when the scriptures themselves do so.

 

[DHK]

This is just double-talk. If God can only forsee what he has decreed, and everything he decrees must come to pass, there are no such things as other possibilities. That is logically impossible.

I agree (that it is double-talk). But only in the sense that I think you are talking past each other and don't have a complete understanding of each other's terminology.

 

[jbh28]

This is just double-talk. If God can only forsee what he has decreed, and everything he decrees must come to pass, there are no such things as other possibilities. That is logically impossible.

I didn't say that unless you mean foresee events that actually happen. DHK mentioned about not understanding terminology and he's right. Just not sure why you don't understand as I have stated it very plainly.

This passage refutes this. God could clearly see what would have happened if David remained in Keilah. But it did not come to pass, which proves God's foreknowledge is not limited to what he has decreed.

If you are referring to God having foreknowledge of possible events, I just agreed to this before. (did you read that portion?). Possible events are not decreed, only actual events.

I will not keep arguing with you, I think I have presented a sound and logical argument. It seems to me that you simply refuse to believe anything that would contradict your cherished doctrine, even when the scriptures themselves do so.

You haven't argued with me yet, you keep running around in circles and don't ever say anything against what I have said. I say I agree with something said, but you go back as if I disagreed. Weird. DHK is right about terminology. Read what I write, not what you think I mean.


to simply: all event that happen have been decreed(directly or by allowance) by God. God also knows possible outcomes. This isn't foreknowledge of an actual outcome because it never happened.

 

[jbh28]

I agree (that it is double-talk). But only in the sense that I think you are talking past each other and don't have a complete understanding of each other's terminology.

It would be double if that was my argument. Of course the terminology is the issue.

 

[Winman]

I agree (that it is double-talk). But only in the sense that I think you are talking past each other and don't have a complete understanding of each other's terminology.

DHK, I have been reading the creeds of Reformed theology, and hearing from Cals/DoGs here for almost two years now. I have read their creeds that say all things decreed must come to pass. I have read articles by noted Reformed authors and scholars that say every atom in the universe is controlled by God's decrees. I have read where they say God's foreknowledge is limited to only what he has decreed. This is not so complicated as Calvinists love to portray their doctrine, I get it.

But if this is so, it is impossible for there to be other possible outcomes. Whatever God decrees will happen, and nothing else can possibly happen (if true).

In 1 Sam 23 we clearly see an account of God's foreknowledge. He plainly told David what would happen if he had remained in Keilah.

But David fled and Saul did not come to Keilah.

This proves God's foreknowledge is not limited to what he has decreed, else David would have remained, and Saul would have come down and captured him.

God's foreknowledge in this example was not based on a decree.

 

[DHK]

DHK, I have been reading the creeds of Reformed theology, and hearing from Cals/DoGs here for almost two years now. I have read their creeds that say all things decreed must come to pass. I have read articles by noted Reformed authors and scholars that say every atom in the universe is controlled by God's decrees. I have read where they say God's foreknowledge is limited to only what he has decreed. This is not so complicated as Calvinists love to portray their doctrine, I get it.

Don't put everyone in the same boat. What you said in the above paragraph is true of some, but not of all. I don't believe jbh takes that hardline stance.

But if this is so, it is impossible for there to be other possible outcomes. Whatever God decrees will happen, and nothing else can possibly happen (if true).

That is the point--"if true."

In 1 Sam 23 we clearly see an account of God's foreknowledge. He plainly told David what would happen if he had remained in Keilah.

No quarrel there. BTW, how do you differentiate between God's foreknowledge and God's omniscience, or is there any differentiation?

But David fled and Saul did not come to Keilah.

David obeyed the advice of the Lord. Saul found out that David was gone. Thus Saul made other plans to pursue after his "enemy" David.

This proves God's foreknowledge is not limited to what he has decreed, else David would have remained, and Saul would have come down and captured him.

Who said anything about a decree here?
We see God's omniscience, as he knows the end from the beginning.
We see God's foreknowledge, as he knew what would happen.
But did he "decree" these things to happen, as in an active decree, the same way that he decreed Creation to happen. I don't believe so.

God's foreknowledge in this example was not based on a decree.

I agree, but that is because of my definition of "decree" which may be different than someone else's. We need to make sure our definitions are the same.