What is God waiting on?

[webdog]

Your analogy doesn't work against Calvinism because no Calvinist believes God makes people sin.

Once again, your analogy doesn't work as an argument against Calvinsim, since no Calvinist believes God tells people to sin.

Exactly.

No calvinist, eh? You might want to rethink that. There are a couple on this thread alone.

Also, I'm glad you agree the following is a strawman...
If man chooses who gets saved and who doesn't, doesn't that make him, man, sovereign?

 

[russell55]

No calvinist, eh? You might want to rethink that. There are a couple on this thread alone.

Also, I'm glad you agree the following is a strawman...
If man chooses who gets saved and who doesn't, doesn't that make him, man, sovereign?

I read through the whole thread I found no one who says that God makes people sin or tells people to sin.

 

[Skandelon]

I read through the whole thread I found no one who says that God makes people sin or tells people to sin.

[SIZE=-1]As a former Calvinist myself I know that Calvinists are theistic [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]determinists[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]; that is, they believe that God causally determines the occurrence of all events, including every thought, decision, and action made throughout the lifetime of each human being. This determination is rooted in what Calvinists call the "eternal decree of God," whereby "God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass" (Westminster Confession of Faith, III/i).

"Whatsoever comes to pass" would include "sin," would it not?
[/SIZE]

 

[Isaiah40:28]

No calvinist, eh? You might want to rethink that. There are a couple on this thread alone.

Also, I'm glad you agree the following is a strawman...
If man chooses who gets saved and who doesn't, doesn't that make him, man, sovereign?

Read carefully, Russell55 said that no Calvinist believes that God "makes people sin or tells them to sin".
You are not being careful to distinguish your understanding of Calvinism(hyper, et al) from what Calvinists believe.
God does not make people sin nor does he tell them to sin.
People sin because they want to.
It just so happens that from God's perspective, the sin conforms to His plan.
Man is still the sinner because the sin was birthed within his mind/desires.
Again:
I do not need God to force me to sin nor do I need him to command me to sin.
I sin because I desire it more at that given moment than I desire holiness.
The blame is mine as the Bible teaches, but the sin conforms to His purposes.
I deserve the punishment that my sins bring me and cannot blame God for accomplishing His will through my sin.
Acts 2:23 is one of the clearest biblical examples of this understanding.

This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death.

 

[MB]

Hi RB and Russel;
The two of you obviously disagree then. RB said;

Peter was comforting the elect and telling them that God was patient toward them, that He would not be willing that any of them would perish.

And russel said;

No, because God's plan comes from his will. It is his will that produces the plan. That's why his plan is called the counsel of his will.

If God is sovereign and this means He is in constant control. How is it control has to be patient? According to RB's view God controls every thought of man why then would He have to be patient? It just doesn't make any sense to me that a Sovereign God who is in control of everything would need to be patient. How can a God in control of the man have to wait on the man? This certainly doesn't show control as the Calvinist would like to believe control is. While we are at it why does man need God to be patient with Him?
MB

 

[Skandelon]

Part of God's plan in creating the world is to show that he is a patient and longsuffering God, and every additional second that God doesn't destroy creation because of sin reveals that attribute of God more fully.

Not in your system it doesn't, not really. I'll explain below...

In addition, part of his plan to save those he has chosen to save is to save them through the particular means he has chosen to use in each case. Carrying out his plan requires that he withhold his wrath and be patient and longsuffering toward them instead, until the time, according to his plan, when he applies Christ's death to them.

Patience, in our language as well as in the original, denotes a willingness on God's part to withhold his wrath in order to wait on something? What is that something? Let's look at some scripture:

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]2Pe 3:9 -
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Rom. 10:21 -
But concerning Israel he says, "All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people."

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Mt 23:37 - [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]"O Jerusalem! Jerusalem that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, yet you were not willing! [/FONT]
Each of these verse express God patience for men to do something. What is that? REPENT!!!

Now, if God is the sole cause of repentance in men through the work of regeneration then He is not waiting on anything outside of himself. As you have expressed, He is only waiting on his plan, or more specifically, on Himself to effectually call (regenerate) the sinner so that he will repent. This understanding renders such passages meaningless and void of any real understanding of what the word patience denotes in these contexts.

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]

[/FONT]

 

[Skandelon]

Read carefully, Russell55 said that no Calvinist believes that God "makes people sin or tells them to sin".
You are not being careful to distinguish your understanding of Calvinism(hyper, et al) from what Calvinists believe.
God does not make people sin nor does he tell them to sin.
People sin because they want to.

As quoted earlier:

[SIZE=-1] When the Calvinist defines freedom in terms of [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]desire[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] (i.e., doing what one [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]wants[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] to do), this formulation initially appears plausible only because it tends to (subtly) evoke a sense of [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]independence[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] or [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]ownership [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]on the part of the human agent for his choices. That is, even though the compatibilist insists that God decisively conditions an agent's environment so as to guarantee the outcome of the agent's choices, we can nonetheless envision God's action in doing so as being compatible with human freedom so long as the human agent in question has the opportunity to interact with his conditioned environment as an independent agent, possessing his own desires and thus owning his choices in relation to that environment. But once we recognize (as we must within the larger deterministic framework encompassing compatibilism) that those very desires of the agent are equally part of the environment that God causally determines, then the line between environment and agent becomes blurred if not completely lost. The human agent no longer can be seen as owning his own choices, for the desires determining those choices are in no significant sense independent of God's decree. For this reason, human desire within the compatibilist framework forms an insufficient basis on which to establish the integrity of human freedom (and from this the legitimacy of human culpability for sin). In this important sense, then, soft determinism folds into hard determinism. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]
Indeterminists, in contrast, recognize that it is not enough to ground human freedom strictly in human desire, and argue that for an act to be genuinely free and provide a sufficient ground for moral culpability, it must be that the agent [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]could have done otherwise[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] than he did, in the sense that "no antecedent conditions and/or causal laws determine that he will perform the action, or that he won't" (Plantinga, [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]God, Freedom, and Evil,[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] p. 29). This is the notion referred to earlier as contra-causal freedom. Some compatibilists argue that indeterminists are too fixated on this notion of contra-causal freedom as being the only sufficient definition for [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]genuine[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] freedom. Feinberg, for example, claims to identify six alternative senses of the term "could/can" which might be carried in the phrase "[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]could[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] have done otherwise," any of which might be adopted by compatibilists in order to provide sufficient content to the notion of human freedom within a compatibilist framework without having to appeal to contra-causal freedom.[/SIZE]

 

[russell55]

[SIZE=-1]As a former Calvinist myself I know that Calvinists are theistic [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]determinists[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]; [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]

Yes.

This determination is rooted in what Calvinists call the "eternal decree of God," whereby "God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass" (Westminster Confession of Faith, III/i).

Yes, but. Yes, the determinism is rooted in God's eternal plan, but the plan, in and of itself, causes nothing to occur. The plan unfolds in history as God works within creation according to the plan. In bringing about the ordained events, God's influence not symmetrical. He ordains all things, but he does not directly cause all things.

"Whatsoever comes to pass" would include "sin," would it not?

[/SIZE]
Yes. That means sinful events are included in the plan. They are not, however, caused by the agency of the Holy Spirit in the way that righteous events in history are. That's what I meant when I said God does not make people sin. The Holy Spirit does not work within people to influence them to sin.

 

[Skandelon]

[SIZE=-1]Russell wrote: "The plan unfolds in history as God works within creation according to the plan"

How exactly is that different from what I wrote: [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]"God causally determines the occurrence of all events, including every thought, decision, and action made throughout the lifetime of each human being."

Also, if you will read my last post you will see how I show this all crumbles into hard determinism and really leaves no room for any real human agency...
[/SIZE]

 

[johnp.]

As a former Calvinist myself I know that Calvinists are theistic determinists; that is, they believe that God causally determines the occurrence of all events, including every thought, decision, and action made throughout the lifetime of each human being.

That is not so Skandelon. That describes me, the heretic , not main stream Calvinism. Mainstream believe sinners make their own choice to go to Hell and as such they are indeterminists.

This determination is rooted in what Calvinists call the "eternal decree of God," whereby "God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass" (Westminster Confession of Faith, III/i).

Cool. Thanks for your support, I thought I had it wrong for a while.

"Whatsoever comes to pass" would include "sin," would it not?

Sure does. You put the case better than most Calvinists but I'm the heretic because I'm not mainstream.

john.

 

[johnp.]

I'll stick this in here though it is a reply to another thread.

Let's see...God being the author of sin is not heretical... (webdog)

God being the Author of sin might be heretical to the majority of Christians including Calvinists but it is not heretical to Calvin's thought below.

...and hold that all events whatsoever are governed by the secret counsel of God. With regard to inanimate objects again we must hold that though each is possessed of its peculiar properties, yet all of them exert their force only in so far as directed by the immediate hand of God. (John Calvin Institutes of the Christian Religion Book Book I Chapter 16. http://www.mbrem.com/calvinism/calprov.htm )

Neither does it contradict scripture. I see that God has bound all men over to disobedience so I believe God has bound us all over to disobedience. Rom 11:32.

I read in the NIV that PR 16:1 To man belong the plans of the heart, but from the LORD comes the reply of the tongue. If I were to use the KJV then even The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, is from the LORD PR 16:1.

Sorry russel, you were wrong.

john.

 

[johnp.]

Isaiah.

God does not make people sin nor does he tell them to sin.

He does man. Scripture is full of God bringing evil onto people by people.

People sin because they want to.

And they want to because God causes them to want to.

It just so happens that from God's perspective, the sin conforms to His plan.

Scripture is missing. Here's mine, God has bound all men over to sin. Jews and Gentiles. If it is not Him then why, RO 9:19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?"

I do not need God to force me to sin nor do I need him to command me to sin.

Yes you do because if you decide a thing then God did not and Sovereignty is lost regardless of the fact that that is what He wanted, the decision is made by man thus man is sovereign.

The blame is mine as the Bible teaches...

That is not in dispute but why does He blame us for who resists His will?

john.

 

[russell55]

If God is sovereign and this means He is in constant control. How is it control has to be patient? According to RB's view God controls every thought of man why then would He have to be patient? It just doesn't make any sense to me that a Sovereign God who is in control of everything would need to be patient. How can a God in control of the man have to wait on the man? . . .

God isn't waiting on the man. He is, however, purposefully delaying his judgment, and it requires his forbearance to postpone merited judgment.

 

[johnp.]

MB.

If God is sovereign and this means He is in constant control.

That is right MB but that is not mainstream Calvinism.

It just doesn't make any sense to me that a Sovereign God who is in control of everything would need to be patient.

God is working out His plan according to the laws of cause and effect. Cause and effect are alien to Him and is there for our benefit. It is for our benefit that He waits the time. He could snap His Fingers and we would all be in eternity now.

How can a God in control of the man have to wait on the man?

Time passes for us and in that we grow. This is His system but He still needs to wait for us. If He wanted to He could just have made His Children but what would we know? He could have created us with all the knowledge without the drag, that's what we would do but we ain't Him.

john.

 

[russell55]

Patience, in our language as well as in the original, denotes a willingness on God's part to withhold his wrath in order to wait on something? What is that something? Let's look at some scripture:

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]2Pe 3:9 -
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Rom. 10:21 -
But concerning Israel he says, "All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people."
[/FONT]
Each of these verse express God patience for men to do something. What is that? REPENT!!!

Yes, he's waiting for repentence in some. And in some with which he's longsuffering, he's not waiting for repentence. The scripture also uses the words "endure with longsuffering" in regards to God's withholding of judgment to those who are already fitted for destruction. In that case, he's not waiting for them to repent, since, at the very least, he knows they won't.

He is not waiting on anything outside of himself. As you have expressed, He is only waiting on his plan, or more specifically, on Himself to effectually call (regenerate) the sinner so that he will repent.

He's waiting on his plan, but he's also waiting for the sinner to repent as part of his plan.

This understanding renders such passages meaningless and void of any real understanding of what the word patience denotes in these contexts.

Only if you don't think that God planning to bring someone to repentence, and then waiting for them to come to repentence in time is somehow incompatible. I don't think it is. Perhaps you find it counterintuitive, but I'm pretty sure you can't show that they are incompatible.

 

[Skandelon]

No, you are right, I can't show them to be incompatible, but they certainly don't seem to fit the most obvious meaning of the texts.

You would need these passages to connote these translations to support your rendering of the texts:[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Rom. 10:21 -
But concerning Israel he says, "All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people."

Your connotation: "I have held my hands to people I have not given the ability to come to me, but I want people to think I'm merciful and longsuffering toward the unrepentant."

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Mt 23:37 - [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]"O Jerusalem! Jerusalem that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, yet you were not willing!

Your connotation: "O Jerusalem...How often I have expressed a hopeless desire to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, yet I was not willing to effectually regenerate you so that you would be willing."

Sorry, but I cannot accept such unfounded translations regardless of how philosophically "compatible" they may be.
[/FONT]

 

[MB]

Hi Russel;

God isn't waiting on the man. He is, however, purposefully delaying his judgment, and it requires his forbearance to postpone merited judgment.

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Being long suffering toward us isn't waiting on His plans. It's delaying His plan for men to be saved. He delays them to wait on man. God is "Sovereign" the problem is the mis-definition of the word Sovereign. It doesn't mean control, it means "Authority". Yes God has the authority and always will. Although to bring His plan about there are things He has to allow, inorder for it to happen. In those circumstances He isn't in control. If He was then He wouldn't be able to allow it. Sin for an example; God cannot even touch it and remain righteous.
MB

 

[Isaiah40:28]

Isaiah



He does man. Scripture is full of God bringing evil onto people by people.


And they want to because God causes them to want to.


Scripture is missing. Here's mine, God has bound all men over to sin. Jews and Gentiles. If it is not Him then why, RO 9:19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?"



Yes you do because if you decide a thing then God did not and Sovereignty is lost regardless of the fact that that is what He wanted, the decision is made by man thus man is sovereign.



That is not in dispute but why does He blame us for who resists His will?

john.

If you want to discuss this with the other Calvinists, then why don't you start a new thread.

 

[johnp.]

Your connotation: "I have held my hands to people I have not given the ability to come to me...

That is exactly right Skandelon. Duet 29:4 But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear.

And:

MT 13:11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

...but I want people to think I'm merciful and longsuffering toward the unrepentant."

That is just your take put in a way that gives me the impression you don't like what you hear. God never gives the impression that He loves all men, ...They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for. 1 Peter 2:8.

MB. His whole plan calls for Him to have patience. He waited for Calvarly. He waited thousands of years with the knowledge that it would, were He to be corporal, make Him sweat blood. He waits for the sheep to come to come. His plan includes His patience. His Sovereignty is not displaced by His having to wait but He could in the twinkling of the eye finish it now with all the elect elected and all the reprobates reprobated. The reason He does not is due to His plan involving cause and effect. I find that simple and easy to understand. He waits for us as He builds His Church. He has set the times but is itching for the fulfilment of the times. He is actually excited about me. When I threw in the towel He rejoiced even though He knew I would come.

God is "Sovereign" the problem is the mis-definition of the word Sovereign.

Sovereign means Sovereign MB. My Sovereign is more Sovereign than your sovereign. That must be true, (Anselm).

It doesn't mean control, it means "Authority".

God is not in control then? I find this a very strange concept. I remember the days I thought He was far off but I became a Christian. Where is the scripture for this non-control, I do not see it? Heb 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word...
All things need to be sustained otherwise they would not be. If God can create objects independant of Him I do not know but the system we are in precludes such. He is responsible for cause and effect and He moves each piece into the next correct position according to the laws of the nature He has established.

Although to bring His plan about there are things He has to allow, inorder for it to happen.

If He has to with anything then He is not Sovereign is He?

In those circumstances He isn't in control.

And with this you want to prove Him Sovereign? A God that is not in control isn't God because He is not Sovereign. DA 4:35 All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?"

We are nothing. You are nothing as I am. Nothing is us. All glory goes to God. We are property and He treats us as such. If He wants to condemn us for no reason He is free to do so and that is precisely what He does. JOB 9:15 Though I were innocent, I could not answer him; I could only plead with my Judge for mercy.

Sin for an example; God cannot even touch it and remain righteous.

Your definition of sin is wrong then. Sin is disobedience to God? Only if He is disobedient to Himself can a charge of Sinner be levelled at Him and then you have the trouble of bringing the charge and bringing Him to His own bench. The Catholic King Charles I had the right argument concerning this only he wasn't sovereign, he only had authority not sovereignty.

john.

 

[johnp.]

If you want to discuss this with the other Calvinists, then why don't you start a new thread.

Hello Isaiah. Are you willing to go the course? I am.


john.