pgwolv
Puritan Board Freshman
Dear fellow believers, it is an honour to make a post on this board on which I have lurked for a long time.
My Calvinist views are still relatively new and I am a poor debater, struggling to keep my thoughts straight when discussing these things. I am in the midst of a discussion with a non-Calvinist. There are a couple of points that have confused me, as I am unable to answer them. Would you please assist me in the proper response? Not mainly for the purpose of the specific discussion, but for my own edification.
One is 1 John 2:16: "For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. "
This verse seems to imply that certain evils are from the world, and seems to imply that God has not decreed them.
The same goes for Jer 32:35: "They built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin." And Jer 19:5: "...and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind..." Here again, it seems that God did not decree this specific sin.
Another thing that confuses me is that this brother keeps on saying that the election discussed by Paul is not to salvation, but to service.
The comment that really has my head spinning is the following: 'You have made this leap that unless God decreed a sin it wouldn't happen? It is akin to God playing two sides of a chessboard. In fact, it negates the entire idea of satan and evil forces. God is literally controlling Satan and his forces, and man, to play the chess moves he wants them to play so that he can play his winning chess moves and then declaring himself the winner. You don't find it absurd that God "arranges" sin against himself so that he can punish that sin, which he "arragned", by "arranging" another person to sin against him as the punishment for the sin he originally "arranged"? All while ignoring 1 John 2:16. I cannot understand the logic behind this. God does not have to do any of this. God in his omnipotence and omniscience allows and permits men the choice to freely sin and reject him. He knows what their choice will be, and then as the most amazing chess player of all time he dominates the chessboard with skill and strategy beyond the imagination of his mere creations. He does not have to decree their sin, he merely defeats them in a glorious display of his own might using their freely chosen sin against them!'
Then I shared AW Pink's quote on God's sovereignty and how Free Will theism belittles God. His reply was: 'God didn't "try his hardest." God shared his very nature with man and will share nothing else. It is now up to us. When I offer my child a choice to clean their room, then give them multiple chances to obey, am I trying my hardest? Am I failing when I still punish them for disobedience? Of course not. This is the choice, and at some point I stop offering the choice. It isn't a matter of failing. This is not an argument against Pink. This is simply showing how Pink has not argued against the non-calvinist but his own strawman of what he thinks the non-calvinist says.'
Sorry, I know there are many different points of discussion, but my mind is muddled right now and I feel like I need some support from this community.
God bless
My Calvinist views are still relatively new and I am a poor debater, struggling to keep my thoughts straight when discussing these things. I am in the midst of a discussion with a non-Calvinist. There are a couple of points that have confused me, as I am unable to answer them. Would you please assist me in the proper response? Not mainly for the purpose of the specific discussion, but for my own edification.
One is 1 John 2:16: "For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. "
This verse seems to imply that certain evils are from the world, and seems to imply that God has not decreed them.
The same goes for Jer 32:35: "They built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin." And Jer 19:5: "...and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind..." Here again, it seems that God did not decree this specific sin.
Another thing that confuses me is that this brother keeps on saying that the election discussed by Paul is not to salvation, but to service.
The comment that really has my head spinning is the following: 'You have made this leap that unless God decreed a sin it wouldn't happen? It is akin to God playing two sides of a chessboard. In fact, it negates the entire idea of satan and evil forces. God is literally controlling Satan and his forces, and man, to play the chess moves he wants them to play so that he can play his winning chess moves and then declaring himself the winner. You don't find it absurd that God "arranges" sin against himself so that he can punish that sin, which he "arragned", by "arranging" another person to sin against him as the punishment for the sin he originally "arranged"? All while ignoring 1 John 2:16. I cannot understand the logic behind this. God does not have to do any of this. God in his omnipotence and omniscience allows and permits men the choice to freely sin and reject him. He knows what their choice will be, and then as the most amazing chess player of all time he dominates the chessboard with skill and strategy beyond the imagination of his mere creations. He does not have to decree their sin, he merely defeats them in a glorious display of his own might using their freely chosen sin against them!'
Then I shared AW Pink's quote on God's sovereignty and how Free Will theism belittles God. His reply was: 'God didn't "try his hardest." God shared his very nature with man and will share nothing else. It is now up to us. When I offer my child a choice to clean their room, then give them multiple chances to obey, am I trying my hardest? Am I failing when I still punish them for disobedience? Of course not. This is the choice, and at some point I stop offering the choice. It isn't a matter of failing. This is not an argument against Pink. This is simply showing how Pink has not argued against the non-calvinist but his own strawman of what he thinks the non-calvinist says.'
Sorry, I know there are many different points of discussion, but my mind is muddled right now and I feel like I need some support from this community.
God bless