In Calvinism why are the sinners God made responsible for what God has made them?

[JLB]

Who does then? Who determines your will? Where did your will come from? There's many, many verses saying God controls aspects of your will (I can give them if asked for),

Ok. Please share your scriptures pertaining to this.

Here is one.

for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure. Philippians 2:13


God works in us to both will or desire and do His good pleasure.


The choice is ours whether to do His will or not.



JLB

 

[Free]

It seems rather unreasonable to think that the creation account that clearly says that God created all things AND all life, means he created all the non-material and concepts. All things means the material. Genesis describes it in detail. No one can read a single passage that says God created mathematics, information, love, courage, humor, truth, honesty and a host of non-material matters. And yet "all things" is supposed to mean "all concepts" or anything the reader can thing of. This is NOT what Genesis says. God did not create truth or love or courage. It doesn't say he does.

And so He did not create good and did not create evil in the sense he created trees and cats (not fond of dogs) and people. And evil, like darkness, is an absence of the opposite as you say. That makes sense. It is really best if we stick to the scripture and not add to it. Saying he created concepts or the non-material is adding to the word.

Of course he didn’t create things such as mathematics, logic, goodness, truth, love, etc.; they exist because he exists. Also:

Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. (ESV)

He clearly created angels and other non-material things. All things would include anything that has come into existence.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Of course he didn’t create things such as mathematics, logic, goodness, truth, love, etc.; they exist because he exists. Also:

Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. (ESV)

He clearly created angels and other non-material things. All things would include anything that has come into existence.

Angels are not non-material. They have bodies. Just because our eyes don’t see them doesn’t mean they are non-material. You know, the Bible says “visible and invisible” not material and non-material. We change it when we decide invisible means non-material. It doesn’t.

There are those who insist God brings about/created/is behind moral evil. They accuse Him of moral evil. It’s telling that they don’t accuse Him of moral good or other immaterial things.

 

[GodsGrace]

You wrongly accuse Fastfredy0 of misquoting you which he did not. He cut and pasted your exact words. You, yourself, need to be more careful in writing out sentences that you do not agree with and are unhappy when posters quote those very sentences word for word. Now that is the last I will say of this and I only deviate from my promise in order to defend the character of God or, in this case, Fredy whom you falsely accused of violating the ToS which he did not.

The other member explained what a paragraph is to someone that knows what a paragraph is.
This is denigrating and is against forum rules.

A sentence, or even a paragraph, shown on it's own, CAN misrepresent what a person is staring.
For instance, it could just be an example, or it could be referring to something altogether different. Journalists di this all the time.

Please stay on topic and do make personal comments.

Do not respond to this post on this thread.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The other member explained what a paragraph is to someone that knows what a paragraph is.
This is denigrating and is against forum rules.

I don’t think that is degrading. Paragraphs are not supposed to consist of one sentence. That’s breaking grammar rules. The poster ignored that or us unaware. Why can’t she simply be corrected when wrong?

A sentence, or even a paragraph, shown on its own, CAN misrepresent what a person is staring.

Frankly speaking, she contradicted herself. Freddy quoted what she actually said. She ought to take greater care which is what I said. It’s all valid.

For instance, it could just be an example, or it could be referring to something altogether different. Journalists di this all the time.

True but has no bearing in this.

Please stay on topic and do make personal comments.

Do not respond to this post on this thread.

Ok I won’t. But you ought to have provided the example by not doing so.

Where is the rule regarding staying on OP?

 

[Fastfredy0]

You wrongly accuse @Fastfredy0 of misquoting you which he did not. He cut and pasted your exact words. You, yourself, need to be more careful in writing out sentences that you do not agree with and are unhappy when posters quote those very sentences word for word. Now that is the last I will say of this and I only deviate from my promise in order to defend the character of God or, in this case, Fredy whom you falsely accused of violating the ToS which he did not.

Thank you. I appreciate your words of support. Took 'guts' and integrity to go against the authorities that be as I assume you will be ostracized and possibly threatened with sanctions for your opinion.

 

[for_his_glory]

You said "God created evil" and it is in a paragraph that stands alone. I've given the definition of a paragraph.... "usually deals with a SINGLE THOUGHT". You said "

One sentence when separated from the whole leads one to misquote the full context and does not stand alone unless it is the only sentence in a post, which in this case was not. The subject of God creating evil came up and I gave the scripture where it is found and gave my understanding of what it meant. If you disagree that's fine with me. Just putting it out there.

 

[for_his_glory]

I don’t think that is degrading. Paragraphs are not supposed to consist of one sentence. That’s breaking grammar rules. The poster ignored that or us unaware. Why can’t she simply be corrected when wrong?

One does not come into the middle of a conversation without knowing exactly what was said. Go back and read post #526, 531, and 550 and you will see it wasn't about one single sentence that was given by Fastfredy0 in my post, but that he only chose that one sentence without the full context of my post.

Stay on topic instead of making derogatory remarks against others that does not involve you. This was between me and Fastfredy0. Need no reply to this and will not answer any reply.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Aside: I must give up 'props' for giving a comprehensive answer to: How do you define FREE WILL. This is a rarity in my experience.

Trying not to lose context here so I am restating some previous discussion ...
Dorothy Mae said:
He [God] does not determine what you will choose.

Who does then? Who determines your will? Where did your will come from? There's many, many verses saying God controls aspects of your will

You do. Why does it [man' will] have to be someone [or something] else? Aside: the [ ]s I added to try to not lose the trend of the discussion ... Lord knows I don't want to be accused of misquoting someone 2

The law of causality is one answer to "Why does it have to be someone else". I'll explain...

The law of causality definition:
Short answer: Every effect must have a cause
Long answer:
Causality is a connection of phenomena through which one thing (the cause) under certain conditions gives rise to, causes something else (the effect). The first cause must be from a source that is eternal. God is the only eternal entity [and thus his being is causeless] and thus the ‘first cause’ of all things. Thus, the God is the cause of the human will, thus man’s will is not free; rather, it is designed by God. (Note: Mormons believe the earth and souls are eternal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1BLR4rufYA ).
“God’s will is, and rightly ought to be, the cause of all things that are. For if it has any cause, something must precede it.” John Calvin

Now...if you can give me an example of something that was not caused (excluding God) then you would disprove the Law of Causality; otherwise my question to you still requires an answer:

Who does then? Who determines your will? Where did your will come from? There's many, many verses saying God controls aspects of your will

Aside: they (philosopher's, theologians) call is a Law because no one has found an exception. Now, we may not know all the causes of an effect like why that raindrop hit my forehead at 1 p.m. on a certain date, but we know there is a cause and logically I should know the First Cause of all things is God.

The whole world, God included, holds you responsible for the choices you make.

Agreed, God holds us responsible .... and then people say, "well if God holds me responsible then I must be FREE (self-determining) to make my chooses. Luckily (technically luck does not exist but I disgress) God answers this:
Romans 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? [implying NO ONE DOES]
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
The verses say it is GODS WILL that drives things, we are held responsible, who you man to question this.

______
Fastfredy0 said: Who determines your will? Where did your will come from?

You do. You were given a will as a free moral agent at birth or conception.

I think I covered this above. Again, I gave verses to support my contention and can give many more. You have not supported your opinion with scripture. This should have in questioning yourself IMO.

____________
Oh, next you want me to give you verses to support the idea that God determines our will. Fine ..
Well, I just did Romans 9, I will continue ... (aside, I already gave several)
"For the LORD of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? And His hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?" (Isaiah 14:27). Now, FREE WILL as you define it would say that man's will disannuls God's purpose or Free Will assumes God has no purpose in many things and it is up to you to decide where He has no purpose.

"Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else! I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure" (Isaiah 46:9-10). Now, FREE WILL as you define it would say that Man declares many (not all) things that occur; that God's counsel in many areas is left to man. Seems strange that an all-wise God would let his creation determine itself somehow to some degree. How could man randomly determine God's best plan.
Aside:
Premise 1: Before the foundation of the world only God existed
Premise 2: From nothing, nothing comes (even God does not know what nothing will do, for then it would be something
Conclusion: It is NOT possible for God to declare the "end from the beginning" because his knowledge would be dependent upon the FREE WILL of men who do not as yet (in eternity past) exist. This also makes prophecy impossible.

Romans 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? 35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
Free Will as you define it answers God's questions. It is I who counsels God for it is I who self-determine what I will do in many regards. Free Will as you define it answers: I will determine to believe salvificly, and God... You are obligated to recompense me for what I have done. I know you have said in 1 Cor. 1:29 so that no one may boast before him. ... but I contend this is and exception as I, of my self-determined Free Will have overcome Adam's curse, though You have said "no one seeks me" I have determined from powers eminated from myself that I did seek and find you and should be rewarded accordingly.

• Psalm 33:10 The Lord brings the counsel of the nations to nought; He makes the thoughts and plans of the peoples of no effect. [puppets … our thoughts and plans are of NO EFFECT]
• Psalm 33:15 He Who fashions the hearts of them all, Who considers all their doings.
• Psalm 105:25 He turned their heart to hate His people, to deal craftily with His servants.
• Psalm 139:16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance, and in Your book all the days [of my life] were written before ever they took shape, when as yet there was none of them. [Your life is written (not recorded) by God, we follow His script and not our own … puppets]

• Proverbs 16:9 A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps. If the Lord directs the steps of a man, is it not proof that he is being controlled or governed by God and therefore he is dependent on God for all things including FAITH?
• Proverbs 19:21 Many plans are in a man’s mind, But it is the Lord’s purpose for him that will stand (be carried out). [puppets. It is God’s purpose that decides our fate]
• Proverbs 20:24 A man’s steps are directed by the LORD. How then can anyone understand his own way? [puppets … our steps are directed by God and not ourselves. We therefore cannot autonomously believe God]
• Proverbs 21:1 The king’s heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord; He turns it whichever way He wishes. [puppets .. God controls us.. His purpose (not ours) will be accomplished]

I can go on a lot longer .. .hopefully this is sufficient
If you can give me verses saying we can self-determine (free from God) what we do that would be appreciated. The question is not whether or not we can choose for we both agree we can choose. I want verses saying one can choose and God will was not a factor.

I don't think I answer everything.... this is long winded enough. 2

 

[Fastfredy0]

One sentence when separated from the whole leads one to misquote the full context and does not stand alone unless it is the only sentence in a post, which in this case was not.

I disagree and as support I gave the definition of a paragraph. Hey, we disagree on grammar; not a biggy. I know of one person who interpreted what you said the way I did. That doesn't (oops, almost wrote 'does' which is anecdotal evidence one can make honest mistakes) prove I am right. It does show this may just be an misunderstanding rather than what you seem to have accused my of... purposely misquoting you for some advantage.

The subject of God creating evil came up and I gave the scripture where it is found and gave my understanding of what it meant. If you disagree that's fine with me. Just putting it out there.

That's fair.
I was surprised at, how do I put this diplomatically ... I was surprised that you made the statement that I purposely misquoted you. As you are the poster, only you truly and completely understand your intention. I don't want to apologize for coming to an apparent inaccurate conclusion as to what you meant and then posting my thoughts on the subject.
I am somewhat disappointed that you came to the conclusion that I as trying to malign you purposely as suggested by you saying that I was breaking some ToS rule.
Aside: We often disagreed, but you were a woman of integrity and I still believe that.

Lunch time... son's birthday ... Maybe do Subway

 

[Fastfredy0]

What is the counsel of his will? That all men repent and come to a knowledge of Him. Do they?

Interesting question. All things (everything) that occurs manifests God's will.

God's will differentiated.
This will initially sound contradictory ... theologian contend that God has 2 wills... before you jump to a conclusion, hear me out ... *giggle*

God’s will is seen as the final authority and the ultimate reason for everything that happens. God’s “permitting” or “preventing” [Compatibilism opinion as opposed by hard determinism] in Providence is the determining factor. But is everything that happens God’s will? This can be a very puzzling question unless you make a distinction which is clearly seen in Scripture. The distinction is between God’s Sovereign will and God’s Moral will. Many times in Scripture we see that God’s desire for our moral conduct is violated by the free choices of mankind, yet God does not prevent but rather permits [Compatibilism theory] this to occur as He has ordained. So then it is not His “moral will” that evil should take place, but in His “Sovereign will” He has permitted it to happen even though it may not have His moral approval. We find out God’s “moral will” by simply reading His “precepts” and “commanded will” about what we should do or how we should behave. For example, God takes no delight in the death of the wicked, yet He most surely wills or decrees the death of the wicked. We find out God’s “Sovereign will” when events actually happen and the “secret” counsel of God is “revealed”, the things He has planned and “decreed” from all eternity. So when we ask questions like, “Is it God’s will for me to do this or that,” we simply look to God’s revelation in Scripture about what He desires for us to do; where God’s will is not found in Scripture then His will is secret. But when events actually occur, we see what the secret counsel of God’s Sovereign will, what he has ordained and approved (what He has permitted or prevented to occur) as it is revealed in time and space. An analogy, albeit crude, would be a parent punishing a child. While it brings them no pleasure or delight to do so, they still do it because the "just" character of the parent demands it.
Author unknown


Stephen Charnock on “moral will“ versus “sovereign (secret) will“ (Compatibilism opinion as opposed by hard determinism)
God doth not will [sin] directly, and by an efficacious will. He doth not directly will it, because he hath prohibited it by his law, which is a discovery of his will; so that if he should directly will sin, and directly prohibit it, he would will good and evil in the same manner, and there would be contradictions in God’s will: to will sin absolutely, is to work it (Psalm 115:3 “God hath done whatsoever he pleased.” God cannot absolutely will it, because he cannot work it. God wills good by a positive decree, because he hath decreed to effect it. He wills evil by a private decree, because he hath decreed not to give that grace [does not restrain] which would certainly prevent it. God doth not will sin simply, for that were to approve it, but he wills it, in order to that good his wisdom will bring forth from it. He wills not sin for itself, but for the event.

Note: God’s will as revealed to us is what people should and should not do and not what God should and should not do. For example, God kills people.

Got to go... sorry for long winded answer. I may have misunderstood your question and it implication.

 

[Free]

Angels are not non-material. They have bodies. Just because our eyes don’t see them doesn’t mean they are non-material.

Just because they appear to have bodies doesn't mean those bodies are material, especially since they can appear in human form (Gen 18) and it seems that they cannot die (Luke 20:36). They are supernatural, spiritual beings, or spirits. It is worth noting that fallen angels are also called unclean or evil spirits.

Eph 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. (ESV)

Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation? (ESV)

Then, there are also the souls/spirits of humans.

You know, the Bible says “visible and invisible” not material and non-material. We change it when we decide invisible means non-material. It doesn’t.

What is invisible that is material?

There are those who insist God brings about/created/is behind moral evil. They accuse Him of moral evil. It’s telling that they don’t accuse Him of moral good or other immaterial things.

To accuse someone of something is to say they have committed an offense, so why would anyone accuse God of moral good? Evil is only being discussed because anti-Calvinists keep bringing it up, but that certainly doesn't mean Calvinists don't believe that God brings about moral good.

Keep in mind that whatever system of theology one holds to, in the very least, God created angels and man with the ability to choose between good and evil. He not only made evil a possibility, he knew that evil would come about, because it was necessary.

 

[GodsGrace]

Just because they appear to have bodies doesn't mean those bodies are material, especially since they can appear in human form (Gen 18) and it seems that they cannot die (Luke 20:36). They are supernatural, spiritual beings, or spirits. It is worth noting that fallen angels are also called unclean or evil spirits.

Eph 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. (ESV)

Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation? (ESV)

Then, there are also the souls/spirits of humans.


What is invisible that is material?


To accuse someone of something is to say they have committed an offense, so why would anyone accuse God of moral good? Evil is only being discussed because anti-Calvinists keep bringing it up, but that certainly doesn't mean Calvinists don't believe that God brings about moral good.

Keep in mind that whatever system of theology one holds to, in the very least, God created angels and man with the ability to choose between good and evil. He not only made evil a possibility, he knew that evil would come about, because it was necessary.

Is a cell an invisible material?
I think so.

 

[Free]

Is a cell an invisible material?
I think so.

I don't think so. While we can't see a single cell with our eyes, we can use specialized technology to see a cell, and we can see the results of many cells put together. With angels and other immaterial things, no technology can help us see them.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Just because they appear to have bodies doesn't mean those bodies are material, especially since they can appear in human form (Gen 18) and it seems that they cannot die (Luke 20:36). They are supernatural, spiritual beings, or spirits. It is worth noting that fallen angels are also called unclean or evil spirits.

Eph 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. (ESV)

Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation? (ESV)

Then, there are also the souls/spirits of humans.

I agree that Angels are spirits (not material) ...maybe because I was told so for decades. But when Dorothy Mae said they are material (I think that's what she said) I have to admit I couldn't find anything to conclusively show her to be incorrect IMO. Yeah, the Bible says angels are spirits, but I am a spirit also; in this case obviously I have a material body and together that form me. My point is: being a spirit does preclude being material also. You note yourself that we are spirit and material.

Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
This verse strongly implies that, at least at times, angels are material as well as immaterial like us.
Ephesians 6:12 says angels are spiritual forces, but this does not preclude a spirit with a body. Christ being another example. I am a spiritual force. Similarly, Heb. 1:4 does not say spirits cannot have a material aspect to them.
Aside: Again, if I had to bet I would say angels are immaterial most of the time. Maybe they have material bodies in their closets to put on 2

What is invisible that is material?

The wind, an atom/molecule, glass, water/ice at times, sound (which is the movement of invisible air), maybe light? and the loche nest monster (added for levity)

I don't think so. While we can't see a single cell with our eyes, we can use specialized technology to see a cell, and we can see the results of many cells put together. With angels and other immaterial things, no technology can help us see them.

Interesting point. One must define invisible then.
If the definition be that some technology exists that can detect it .... then in the 1800s atoms were invisible and yet now they are visible. This presents a difficulty as a thing cannot be invisible and visible. If the definition be that something is visible if it can be detected then all things are visible to God.
One can create their own definition to favor their side of the argument (i.e. use of words racism, equity, inclusion)
I suggest the standard is the dictionary which in this case states invisible as:

1. Impossible to see; not visible.
2. Not accessible to view; hidden.
3. Not easily noticed or detected; inconspicuous.

Using a dictionary, an atom or the air we breathe is invisible. If one wishes to redefine a word other than found in a dictionary then one should supply their meaning and thus be understood by those that read further regarding things applicable to their term. Example: Free will has several meanings so it would be best to supply a meaning before discussing it further. Similarly, love has differently meanings to people so one should give their definition to avoid confusion.
Love Fred (ah, not romantic love)

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't think so. While we can't see a single cell with our eyes, we can use specialized technology to see a cell, and we can see the results of many cells put together. With angels and other immaterial things, no technology can help us see them.

Why doesn't it mean that God simply created all things that we can see and that we cannot see.
Just because we can't see something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Re Angels. Don't have anything to add.
Just that material things can't be in heaven, at least not how we know them to be. Even Jesus got His glorified body.

 

[hawkman]

What is invisible that is material?

The wind, an atom/molecule, glass, water/ice at times, sound (which is the movement of invisible air), maybe light? and the loche nest monster (added for levity)

Now sound we can capture a facsimile of by recording the sound . But does sound have a material quality ?

The wind I would say is not material . Can you send me a jug full of wind ? But there is compressed air .

Verses about the wind .
John 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Acts 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

 

[hawkman]

Why doesn't it mean that God simply created all things that we can see and that we cannot see.
Just because we can't see something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Re Angels. Don't have anything to add.
Just that material things can't be in heaven, at least not how we know them to be. Even Jesus got His glorified body.

Spirit could be a material we do not understand because it is here with us in our material world .

 

[GodsGrace]

Spirit could be a material we do not understand because it is here with us in our material world .

We are spirits...
In a material world.
Sting

 

[GodsGrace]

What about our conscience?
Scientists don't even know what it is and are really studying it right now.

It's not visible and not material.
This should be a thread.