# Need some critique (be gentle!)



## Supahrob (Aug 18, 2009)

Heya!
Ok, so I am talking to my dad (and one of my brothers) about Calvinism and I am trying to prepare for our next study/discussion.

In our last meeting, I tried to ask the question "*IF* it turns out that the Bible actually teaches that God *DOES* indeed create some people for the purpose of sending them to hell, then that is the right and good thing to do (by virtue of the fact that everything God does is right and good) - correct?" My dad was very hesitant to answer the question at all, and seemed to think I was setting him up. 

I wasn't, I simply wanted to establish a "base line" that said 'anything God does is right, regardless of our opinion on the matter - *if we disagree with God in anyway, WE are wrong*' I wasn't even really addressing the reprobation issue, just using this as a point.


So the first critique I need is on my baseline. Is this a fair and reasonable baseline that actual truly saved Bible believing Christians should be able to agree on, and (if it is) is there a better way I could go about establishing the baseline?

The next critique I am asking for is about a question I am thinking of asking at our next study. It stems from another question I already asked, which is "If, out of all human history, out of all the people who have ever existed, or will ever exist - if God were to decide to only save one single person, would that not still be a merciful & gracious act?" My dad's reply was "Gracious to that one person." That made me think my dad might have the unconscious opinion that God somehow owes everyone a "shot" at believing. My dad believes that God knew ahead of time who would believe the Gospel, and calls those people (though he also believes God invites all people - the further I get away from this neo-Arminianism, the less I understand it...)

So the question I am thinking of asking is this "What if God knew someone would believe the Gospel, but decided NOT to call that person? Would God then be unjust? Is God somehow _obligated_ to call everyone?"

Is that a good question, and if so, how can I make it better? If it isn't a good question, what would be a good question that somehow would make my dad (who is a VERY intelligent man and a very logical thinker) deal with the issue of God not being under obligation to save anyone.

Thank you in advance!

Take care,
Rob


----------



## Reluctantly Reforming (Aug 18, 2009)

Rob, have your previous discussions covered the sinful state of every man - that the flesh is enmity against God, with neither the ability nor the inclination to submit to the law of God? 

It's sounding like your dad would like to keep the conversation oriented on how much nicer his God is than yours toward poor sinners. I wonder if he has much of a grasp of depravity.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Aug 18, 2009)

You don't want to emphasize the sovereignty aspect alone, but the fact that all going to hell deserve to be there. Hell is an act of God's justice against sinners. They get what they deserve, and we instead are shown mercy and Christ takes what we deserve. When we're all under the death sentence, then who are we to complain when God shows mercy to some and grants justice to others.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Aug 18, 2009)

The kind of questions your are putting forth and the way you are doing it would make me feel the same way your Dad does and I already believe what you do. It's like you are playing a bait-n-switch game or something.

Just put the issues out on the table: "Here's what I believe and here's what I hear you saying you believe. I think it is important that we discuss this difference in understanding?" If so, let's establish our common ground:
1. The Bible is the Word of God
2. God's character and being is such that whatever he does is right.
3. God is sovereign over his creration -- not merely _de jure_, but _de facto_.
4. Mankind is utterly sinful and all are justly under condemnation.
5. etc, or whatever you think is needed.

Then it is a matter of hammering out the texts that have given rise to the different understandings you are concerned about, i.e. Calvinism vs Arminianism.

Or. Alternatively, start with a discussion of the basic differences between Calvinism and Arminianism and go from there.


----------



## Supahrob (Aug 18, 2009)

hmm - very good points so far. I appreciate the help. I love my dad very much and want to be respectful in the conversation, thats why I thought I would ask you all here (I have been lurking here for almost a year, I am very familiar with the amount of brain power here and I wanna make use of it)

My dad came very close to saying something along the lines of saying "If the Bible teaches that about God, then it's wrong because God wouldn't do that!" Now, he stopped himself, as he deeply believes in the Bible and loves God with all his heart... but he has heavily neo-arminian (Calvary Chapel) traditions.

I just want us to be able to agree ahead of time that whatever the Bible says that God does is right and good - and I am looking for a good question (the pithier the better) to help us get to that point. Basically, I am sure we both believe it, I just want him to say it out loud. But most Calvary Chapel people are very skiddish when it comes to calvinism.... they don't know much about it, but they sure do hate it (I know, becuase until a few years ago, I was going to a Calvary Chapel and felt the same way).

Take care,
Rob


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Aug 18, 2009)

Here's a thought. How about addressing the question this way. Two men are sitting in church and hear a clear presentation of the gospel. One man believes and the other rejects the message leaving in unbelief. Now the question is, why the difference? Is the difference found in the two men?

If what God does for man, he does for all alike, then the difference _must be_ in men. The one man must be smarter, more perceptive, more sensitive, or something as compared to the other man, or else both would have believed. If so, then the determining factor in salvation is in man, not God. And thus man has reason to boast -- "I chose God, you are apparently too dense. You better wake up and save yourself by believing, like I did. After all, God has done his part, it's up to you to do yours."

This is the synergism of the Arminians as opposed to the monergism of Calvinists, where God alone saves man.


----------



## White Knight (Aug 18, 2009)

After reading this part, 
"So the question I am thinking of asking is this "What if God knew someone would believe the Gospel, but decided NOT to call that person? Would God then be unjust? Is God somehow obligated to call everyone?"
I thought of Matt 11:20-24, but I don't know if that would advance your discussion or just pick a fight 

Not knowing your father or brother, are they open with genuine questions or quiet?

If they are open, focusing on their questions rather than their answers to your questions may prompt you to ask better questions yourself. Correct me if I'm wrong but you are in Romans aren't you? If so, then questions will come naturally, no need to push. Pry yourself into their thought, ask genuine questions yourself because you are trying to understand them also. 
"(though he also believes God invites all people - the further I get away from this neo-Arminianism, the less I understand it...)"


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Aug 18, 2009)

I suppose you could explore the following with your father:



_Would a world with no sin be the best possible world for the common good?_ *Yes.* 

_Would a world with no sin be the best possible world for the greatest good?_ *No.* 

You see, there is an incompatibility between the common good and the greater good. The greatest good is not for the greatest number. Instead, there is a greater good for a lesser number or a lesser good for a greater number. Redemption is a greater good for God’s elect, while a world that never fell is a lesser good for every creature of God. The scriptures tell us that the fall of mankind in Eden was foreordained (Gal. 3:22, Rom. 11:32) by God. But why? God foreordained the fall of mankind so that the elect of God would glory in God’s wisdom as seen in His merciful and just actions (John 9-12; 1 John 4:9-10; Rom. 9:17,22-23; Eph. 3:9-10). 

AMR


----------



## Iconoclast (Aug 19, 2009)

Rob, 
Welcome to the PB.
You said this in your post:


> So the question I am thinking of asking is this "What if God knew someone would believe the Gospel, but decided NOT to call that person? Would God then be unjust? Is God somehow obligated to call everyone?"



God does not have to learn anything as he is all knowing. Being that God has purposed everything that comes to pass, there is no Hypothetical, what if's.
There is no person that would ever believe the gospel,apart from God drawing that person to faith, Psalm 14- romans 3
Jn 6:37-44
Man died in the fall of Adam, he was not just wounded.
God is only obligated to himself in what is called the covenant of redemption.
The Father, Son, and Spirit, plan,purpose and accomplish redemption of the elect in time and eternity.


----------



## Supahrob (Aug 20, 2009)

Hmm - judging from Iconoclasts post I think I might have been a little unclear. I am a calvinist and firmly believe that God knows everything and has no need to learn anything. I believe God saves who He intends to save and there is no chance of Him failing. 

My dad does not, so my questions are hypotheticals (there is nothing wrong with using hypotheticals to sharpen logic and illustrate points). It's a twist on Greg Koukl's (also a calvinist) "Taking The Roof Off" tactic - you make the person really take a look at their worldview...sort of saying "Lets see if you can really live in the world you say you believe in"

Take care,
Rob


----------



## coramdeo (Aug 20, 2009)

*Thanks*

Thanks to you all for this helpfull discussion. I am in endless discussions daily with my non-calvinist friends.


----------



## carlgobelman (Sep 4, 2009)

Supahrob said:


> Heya!
> Ok, so I am talking to my dad (and one of my brothers) about Calvinism and I am trying to prepare for our next study/discussion.
> 
> In our last meeting, I tried to ask the question "*IF* it turns out that the Bible actually teaches that God *DOES* indeed create some people for the purpose of sending them to hell, then that is the right and good thing to do (by virtue of the fact that everything God does is right and good) - correct?" My dad was very hesitant to answer the question at all, and seemed to think I was setting him up.
> ...



Rob,

Regarding your question. I don't think it's an issue of God deciding NOT to choose someone who would believe the gospel. God's sovereignty in election ALWAYS coincides with our decisions to believe or not believe. In other words, everyone whom God sovereignly chooses to elect unto salvation WILL come to faith in Christ through God's efficacious call and being drawn by the Spirit's irresistible grace. On the flip side, everyone whom God sovereignly decides to pass over for salvation will always choose to reject God and suppress the truth in unrighteousness.

I think we see this illustrated in the case of Pharaoh in Exodus. God tells Moses that he will harden Pharaoh's heart, and we see throughout the narrative that God's does, in fact, harden Pharaoh's heart. However, we also see in the narrative that Pharaoh hardens his own heart. God's sovereign choice always intersects with our free choices. I think R.C. Sproul calls this the doctrine of concurrence.

If I were to improve your question, I might go in this direction:

Is God obligated to save anyone? Answer: No
The salvation of anyone is an act of pure sovereign grace.
Does God act unjustly toward the one whom he passes over for election? Answer: No.

Essentially the scenario we have is that one is either the recipient of God's divine grace or God's divine justice. No one is treated unjustly by God.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Supahrob (Sep 5, 2009)

hmm - thank you all for your replies, and I hope you offer more advice. I see the first problem I have is that I apparently just didn't explain things well.

I am a Calvinist - I understand the Doctrines of Grace. The question I was posing to my dad was an entirely hypothetical one. In my question, I was allowing his position to be correct (that God chooses those who He knew in advance would believe), but I was only allowing it for the purposes of THIS question. The question (What if God knew someone would believe, but decided NOT to offer them the gospel) is intended specifically to bring out the issue of does God HAVE to save anyone? I mean, the person in the question is still a sinner and deserving of hell - the underlying question is "Is God unjust in punishing lawbreakers because He doesn't offer them a pardon first?"

The more I think about the question, the more I think it is THE question to ask an arminian or semi-arminian, in order to get them to honestly deal with the issue of grace.

So again, I know that it is God who chooses, NOT us - the question is not a trick question to my dad, it is simply a fictional situation, a hypothetical environment in which we are forced to deal with a central issue: Does God OWE sinners, enemies who hate him, a pardon? Whether they would or wouldn't accept it is not the issue (again, I know that isn't a Biblical concept anyway, but my dad thinks it is, so I am seeing if he can truly live with his worldview), the issue is whether God is under some obligation to offer a pardon to ANYONE.

I hope this clears it up.

Take care,
Rob


----------

