I want to share a passage from the introduction to Loraine Boettner’s book, ”The Reformed Faith”, where he deals with the fundamental differences between Calvinists and Arminians. This was originally published in 1983 and I think it is very relevant for today’s Christian church. I will highlight a few of Boettner’s observations in bold which I found particularly insightful. I’d appreciate hearing what others may think about Boettner’s assessment of the state of the Christian church as it has departed from teaching the Doctrines of Grace (also known as Calvinism).
Also, as you read through this, consider the contrast between the Adventist “Great Controversy theme"–where God is engaged in a cosmic battle with Satan and must prove Himself–and the doctrines of the Reformed faith that affirm God’s total control over His creation.
Greg
----
The purpose of this article is to set forth, in plain language and in terms easily understood, the basic differences between the Calvinistic and the Arminian system to theology, and to show what the Bible teaches concerning these subjects. The harmony that exists between the various doctrines of the Christian faith is such that error in regard to any one of them produces more or less distortion in all of the others.
There are in reality only two types of religious thought. There is the religion of faith, and there is the religion of works. We believe that what has been known in Church History as Calvinism is the purest and most consistent embodiment of the religion of faith, while that which has been known as Arminianism has been diluted to a dangerous degree by the religion of works and that it is therefore an inconsistent and unstable form of Christianity. In other words, we believe that Christianity comes to its fullest and purest expression in Reformed Faith.
In the early part of the fifth century these two types of religious thought came into direct conflict in a remarkably clear contrast as embodied in two fifth-century theologians, Augustine and Pelagius. Augustine pointed men to God as the source of all true spiritual wisdom and strength, while Pelagius threw men back on themselves and said that they were able in their own strength to do all that God commanded, otherwise God would not command it. We believe that Arminianism represents a compromise between these two systems, but that while in its more evangelical form, as in early Wesleyanism, it approaches the religion of faith, it nevertheless does contain serious elements of error.
We are living in a day in which practically all of the historic churches are being attacked from within by unbelief. Many of them have already succumbed. And almost invariably the line of descent has been from Calvinism to Arminianism, from Arminianism to Liberalism, and then to Unitarianism. And the history of Liberalism and Unitarianism shows that they deteriorate into a social gospel that is too weak to sustain itself. We are convinced that the future of Christianity is bound up with that system of theology historically called “Calvinism.” Where the God centered principles of Calvinism have been abandoned, there has been a strong tendency downward into the depths of man centered naturalism or secularism. Some have declared - rightly, we believe - that there is no consistent stopping place between Calvinism and atheism.
The basic principle of Calvinism is the sovereignty of God. This represents the purpose of the Triune God as absolute and unconditional, independent of the whole finite creation, and originating solely in the eternal counsel of His will. He appoints the course of nature and directs the course of history down to the minutest details. His decrees therefore are eternal, unchangeable, holy, wise and sovereign. They are represented in the Bible as being the basis of the divine foreknowledge of all future events, and not conditioned by that foreknowledge or by anything originating in the events themselves.
Every thinking person readily sees that some sovereignty rules his life. He was not asked whether or not he would have existence, when or what or where he would be born, whether in the twentieth century or before the Flood, whether male or female, whether white or black, whether in the United States, or China, or Africa. All of those things were sovereignly decided for him before he had any existence. It has been recognized by Christians in all ages that God is the Creator and Ruler of the world, and that as such He is the ultimate source of all power that is found in the world. Hence nothing can come to pass apart from His sovereign will. Otherwise He would not be truly GOD. And when we dwell on this truth we find that it involves considerations which establish the Calvinistic and disprove the Arminian position.
By virtue of the fact that God has created everything that exists, He is the absolute Owner and final Disposer of all that He has made. He exerts not merely a general influence, but actually rules in the affairs of men (Acts 4:24-28). Even the nations are as the small dust of the balance when compared with His greatness (Is. 40:12-17). Amid all the apparent defeats and inconsistencies of our human lives, God is actually controlling all things in undisturbed majesty. Even the sinful actions of men can occur only by His permission and with the strength that he gives the creature. And since He permits not unwillingly but willingly, then all that comes to pass - including even the sinful actions and ultimate destiny of men - must be, in some sense, in accordance with what He has eternally purposed and decreed. Just in proportion as this is denied, God is excluded from the government of the world, and we have only a finite God. Naturally, some problems arise which in our present state of knowledge we are not able fully to explain. But that is not a sufficient reason for rejecting what the Scriptures and the plain dictates of reason affirm to be true.
And shall we not believe that God can convert a sinner when He pleases? Cannot the Almighty, the omnipotent Ruler of heaven and earth, change the character of the creatures He has made? He changed the water into wine at Cana and converted Saul on the road to Damascus. The leper said, “Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean” (Matt. 8:2). And at a word his leprosy was cleansed. Let us not believe, as do the Arminians, that God cannot control the human will, or that He cannot regenerate a soul when He pleases. He is as able to cleanse the soul as the body. If He chose He could raise up such a flood of Christian ministers, missionaries and workers of various kinds, and could so work through His Holy Spirit, that the entire world would be converted in a very short time. If He had purposed to save all men He could have sent hosts of angels to instruct them and to do supernatural works on the earth. He could have worked marvelously in the heart of every person so that no one would have been lost.
Since evil exists only by His permission, He could, if He chose, blot it out of existence. His power in this respect was shown, for instance, in the work of the destroying angel who in one night slew all of the first-born of the Egyptians (Ex. 12:29), and in another night slew 185,000 of the Assyrian army (II Kings 19:35). It was shown when the earth opened and swallowed Korah and his rebellious allies (Nu. 16.31-35). King Herod was smitten and died a horrible death (Acts 12:23). In Daniel 4:34-35 we read that the Most High God’s “dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom from generation to generation; and all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; and he doeth according to his will in the armies of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; and no one can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?”
All of this brings out the basic principle of the Reformed Faith - the sovereignty of God. God created this world in which we find ourselves, He owns it, and He is running it according to His own sovereign good pleasure. God has lost none of His power, and it is highly dishonoring to Him to suppose that He is struggling along with the human race, doing the best He can to persuade men to do right, but unable to accomplish His eternal, unchangeable, holy, wise, and sovereign purpose.
Any system which teaches that the serious intentions of God can in some cases be defeated, and that man, who is not only a creature but a sinful creature, can exercise veto power over the plans of Almighty God, is in striking contrast to the biblical idea of his immeasurable exaltation by which He is removed from all weaknesses of humanity. That the plans of men are not always executed is due to a lack of power, or a lack of wisdom, or both. But since God is unlimited in these and in all other resources, no unforeseen emergencies can arise. To Him the causes for change have no existence. To assume that His plan fails and that he strives to no effect is to reduce Him to the level of His creatures and make Him no God at all.
I want to share a passage from the introduction to Loraine Boettner’s book, ”The Reformed Faith”, where he deals with the fundamental differences between Calvinists and Arminians. This was originally published in 1983 and I think it is very relevant for today’s Christian church. I will highlight a few of Boettner’s observations in bold which I found particularly insightful.
Original bold no longer applies to this quote.
I’d appreciate hearing what others may think about Boettner’s assessment of the state of the Christian church as it has departed from teaching the Doctrines of Grace (also known as Calvinism).
Also, as you read through this, consider the contrast between the Adventist “Great Controversy theme"–where God is engaged in a cosmic battle with Satan and must prove Himself–and the doctrines of the Reformed faith that affirm God’s total control over His creation.
Greg
----
Every thinking person readily sees that some sovereignty rules his life. He was not asked whether or not he would have existence, when or what or where he would be born, whether in the twentieth century or before the Flood, whether male or female, whether white or black, whether in the United States, or China, or Africa. All of those things were sovereignly decided for him before he had any existence. It has been recognized by Christians in all ages that God is the Creator and Ruler of the world, and that as such He is the ultimate source of all power that is found in the world. Hence nothing can come to pass apart from His sovereign will. Otherwise He would not be truly GOD. And when we dwell on this truth we find that it involves considerations which establish the Calvinistic and disprove the Arminian position.
By virtue of the fact that God has created everything that exists, He is the absolute Owner and final Disposer of all that He has made. He exerts not merely a general influence, but actually rules in the affairs of men (Acts 4:24-28). Even the nations are as the small dust of the balance when compared with His greatness (Is. 40:12-17). Amid all the apparent defeats and inconsistencies of our human lives, God is actually controlling all things in undisturbed majesty. Even the sinful actions of men can occur only by His permission and with the strength that he gives the creature. And since He permits not unwillingly but willingly, then all that comes to pass - including even the sinful actions and ultimate destiny of men - must be, in some sense, in accordance with what He has eternally purposed and decreed. Just in proportion as this is denied, God is excluded from the government of the world, and we have only a finite God. Naturally, some problems arise which in our present state of knowledge we are not able fully to explain. But that is not a sufficient reason for rejecting what the Scriptures and the plain dictates of reason affirm to be true.
Source: The Reformed Faith, pp. 1-4
There is a story told, an eyewitness account of something that happened during Nazi occupation in the Warsaw ghetto. It goes thus:
<quote>
Zosia was a little girl ... the daughter of a physician. During an “action” one of the Germans became aware of her beautiful diamondlike dark eyes. “I could make two rings out of them,” he said, “one for myself and one for my wife.”
His colleague is holding the girl.
“Let’s see whether they are really so beautiful. And better yet, let’s examine them in our hands.”
Among the buddies exuberant gaiety breaks out. One of the wittiest proposes to take the eyes out. A shrill screaming and the noisy laugher of the soldier-pack. The screaming penetrates our brains, pierces our heart, the laugher hurts like the edge of a knife plunged into our body. The screaming and the laugher are growing, mingling and soaring to heaven.
O God, whom will You hear first?
What happens next is that the fainting child is lying on the floor.
Instead of eyes two bloody wounds are staring. The mother, driven mad, is held by the women.
this ime they left Zosia to her mother…
At one of the next “actions,” little Zosia was taken away. It was, of course, necessary to annihilate the blind child.
<end quote>
This event and millions like it, all as cruel and all equally mocking everything we view as decent, they happen every year, every month, every week and every day. To say that God would permit this willingly, that this would be according to Gods eternal purpose and decree… This is unfathomable for me. What greater accusation could anyone throw at God, than this, that He who so loved the world… would eternaly decree according to His purpose and willingly permit that a child would have her eyes riped out of her head by mocking soldiers. If this is not mocking God and His self-revelation in Jesus, I do not know what it would take.
It is easy to hold such a perspective in the protected environments where we live in the western world, but could any of you have stood in that room in that moment declaring, “God wills it”, like a crusader of old storming in to butcher the jews and arabs of Jerusalem? Where is the love of God in this declaration made in the quoted book in the OP? Where is the revelation of Jesus in all of it? Where is the gospel?
The presence of evil in this world is not mutually exclusive to God’s absolute sovereignty, nor does it overturn the profound depth of His love in Jesus Christ. Evil exists because we sinned in Adam, but since that first sin, we are in bondage to our nature and need God to act on our behalf.
We do not know the end of the story of little Zosia above. Maybe she died at the hands of a cruel soldier and is now resting in the arms of Christ. We forget too easily that God is bigger than what we can imagine, and his purposes are largely hidden from us.
The presence of evil may not be mutually exclusive to God’s sovereignty, but the evil of the world happening at God’s decree and willing choise is compleately in opposition to the love He showed in Jesus the Christ aswell as to God’s declaration of how He abhors sin. Evil does exist because we sinned in Adam as you say, but if Adam’s sin was also at God’s decree and within His sovereign will such that Adam could have done nothing differently, it serves as no explanation in God’s favour.
We are dirty because we fell on the soil, but what honour is there to God if He caused us to fall by stretching out His legg to trip us? Should we be happy that He sovereignly decided to help “some” of us back up and left the rest to burn?
Whatever happened to Zosia, we can know that God will deal justly with her, and that God is one who is slow to anger and swift to mercy, that God wishes the death of no human but that God wants us all to live. Therefore we can be assured that Zosia will recieve nothing bad from God.
To say that God stretches out his leg to trip us so we fall in the soil is to say he is the author of sin. I never said this and I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Adam and Eve were truly free in that they lacked any sin. As such, they were the only perfectly free humans to live on this earth. They chose to sin, and we are now suffering the consequences, in bondage to their original sin (Romans 5:12-13). God is not required to save any of us, but in his grace He freely chooses to. We are not free to choose Him, but He chooses us. He is indeed the Author and Finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2)
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you. These things I command you, so that you will love one another. (John 15:16-17 ESV)
So, would this mean that Adam and Eve before their fall into sin were not governed by Gods providential sovreignty in the same way we are? Would you even be saying that the arminian view of freedom applied to this situation but that God had to change this and take back the freedom once sin had occured? For even if sin governs what choises we are more likely to make, it is God alone who decides what freedom to grant us or not go grant us.
The first quote I made and marked in bold and underlined could very well be described as painting God as the author of sin, so I think I have done nothing more than restating what was said there in theological terms into an everyday analogy.
That example you gave above about the way the girl was tragic indeed. That little girl’s reward in heaven will be truly great.
One thing to consider in the problem of suffering is this:
God sovereignly planned for the greatest suffering and evil ever committed when it was decreed in eternity past that God’s own Son would take the penalty on Himself for our sins. What greater evil and suffering has ever occurred, than what happened to Jesus? All the suffering we go through has to be looked at through the lens of the ultimate suffering of the Son of God Himself in taking on humanity and suffering more than anyone in history has suffered, both mentally and physically.
God does not create evil. He created man originally perfect, but the human race was corrupted as a result of Adam’s sin. God’s sovereignty does not take away the freedom of choice of sinful human beings. Man is fully responsible for his sin. But even in man’s sin, God’s purposes are not thwarted. Look at the suffering Joseph endured at the hands of his brothers. But God meant it for good. When I think about the problem of pain and suffering in this way, it has made it easier for me to endure some of the trials in my life.
It is true that Jesus took the greatest suffering upon Himself. And I think you are right in saying that it helps to view the suffering of the world with the view that God is suffering with the world.
I also do not believe that God creates evil, but as I see it, this is a coherent view because I also do not believe that God would willingly permit evil to happen on earth. But for anything to happen on earth which God does not want to happen, God can not have created earth in such a way that only that which He unilateraly decrees and purposes come to pass. Saying that God does not create evil is surely at odds with the statement that “Any system which teaches that the serious intentions of God can in some cases be defeated, and that man, who is not only a creature but a sinful creature, can exercise veto power over the plans of Almighty God, is in striking contrast to the biblical idea of his immeasurable exaltation by which He is removed from all weaknesses of humanity.” If God’s intentions are always good and never evil, then His intentions must be defeated sometimes because the world we live in is sometimes good but often evil. If God’s intentions are never defeated, then it cannot be said that they are never evil and always good.
Also Adams sin, if Gods purposes are never defeated, how could Adam sin unless it was God’s purpose that Adam would in fact sin? It would be another thing to say that God intended man to live in the perfection that He created us in, but when sin came along God had to postpone His intentions for as much time as it takes for sin to play out its game until God decides that it is enough and returns us to be entierly within His original intention.
Looking at the case of Joseph, would Gods intentions have been thwarted if his brothers had NOT sold him as a slave to Egypt? Would Gods intentions have been thwarted if the wife of his first master had NOT tried to seduce him? Did Gods plan for Joseph require these evil actions or did Gods plan for Joseph work out despite of these evil actions? I suggest that Gods plan had worked even if Josephs brothers would not have sold him to slavery, God would have found another way of accomplishing His purposes.
Saying that God does not create evil is surely at odds with the statement that “Any system which teaches that the serious intentions of God can in some cases be defeated, and that man, who is not only a creature but a sinful creature, can exercise veto power over the plans of Almighty God, is in striking contrast to the biblical idea of his immeasurable exaltation by which He is removed from all weaknesses of humanity.” If God’s intentions are always good and never evil, then His intentions must be defeated sometimes because the world we live in is sometimes good but often evil. If God’s intentions are never defeated, then it cannot be said that they are never evil and always good.
And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. Rom. 8:28
Sin is a part of God’s plan in working for good, for a good purpose, even sin cannot frustrate God’s plans. All things, good or bad, work together in God’s plans for good. On the same line of thought there are more other situations presented in the Bible which are available for us to see God’s working for good, Joesph’s situation is one of them. I’ll come back later and develop the thought.
Adding to what Gabriel wrote, can we make God responsible for sin because He created Adam free to choose between good and evil? Even if God knew beforehand that Adam would choose evil, this doesn’t make God the author of sin.
Put another way, God retains His perfect righteousness even if His creation chooses evil. And what’s more, He demonstrates His grace in saving sinners who deserve nothing but the consequences of their sin.
...but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8 ESV)
It is true that Jesus took the greatest suffering upon Himself. And I think you are right in saying that it helps to view the suffering of the world with the view that God is suffering with the world.
I also do not believe that God creates evil, but as I see it, this is a coherent view because I also do not believe that God would willingly permit evil to happen on earth. But for anything to happen on earth which God does not want to happen, God can not have created earth in such a way that only that which He unilateraly decrees and purposes come to pass. Saying that God does not create evil is surely at odds with the statement that “Any system which teaches that the serious intentions of God can in some cases be defeated, and that man, who is not only a creature but a sinful creature, can exercise veto power over the plans of Almighty God, is in striking contrast to the biblical idea of his immeasurable exaltation by which He is removed from all weaknesses of humanity.” If God’s intentions are always good and never evil, then His intentions must be defeated sometimes because the world we live in is sometimes good but often evil. If God’s intentions are never defeated, then it cannot be said that they are never evil and always good.
Also Adams sin, if Gods purposes are never defeated, how could Adam sin unless it was God’s purpose that Adam would in fact sin? It would be another thing to say that God intended man to live in the perfection that He created us in, but when sin came along God had to postpone His intentions for as much time as it takes for sin to play out its game until God decides that it is enough and returns us to be entierly within His original intention.
Looking at the case of Joseph, would Gods intentions have been thwarted if his brothers had NOT sold him as a slave to Egypt? Would Gods intentions have been thwarted if the wife of his first master had NOT tried to seduce him? Did Gods plan for Joseph require these evil actions or did Gods plan for Joseph work out despite of these evil actions? I suggest that Gods plan had worked even if Josephs brothers would not have sold him to slavery, God would have found another way of accomplishing His purposes.
ur meager and prideful comprehension of our infinitely incomprehensible Creator is woefully demonstrated when we lower (humanize) the great “I Am” who created us, in His image, and loves us beyond our wildest dreams. When we apply human understanding and references to God, we insult Him by putting limits on the limitless.
Romans 9:20 NIV: 20On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
With all respect, in Västergötland’s text he uses the phrase “God’s intentions...”, “His intentions...”, and “God intended...”. To use the words “intention”, “intentions”, or “intended” when trying to describe the WILL of God is scripturally irrational. The reason I say this is that to apply the word “intention” to a behavior or a desire implies the possibility of being thwarted, of suffering failure! The Bible tells us that God has always existed and always will. He is the creator of all things including but not limited to our puny concept of time. God willed the universe into existence. It was perfect in His eyes, just as He… (dare I say “intended it to be”?), I don’t think so! Better said, just as He “Willed it to be”!
All we can say for sure is that God allowed sin to enter the world via a prideful human act and we’ve been suffering this inheritance ever since. The only cure for our suffering is faith in the Sinless One whom God sent to redeem us from the oblivion that we so surely deserve. As ugly and shameful as the human existence has been, God knew the solution even before the solution was needed! It was all laid out on His table (please excuse the human metaphor here) before we even existed! We can’t understand it! We don’t need to understand it! This is where the John 3:16 faith comes in to assure and comfort us. What is happening MUST happen as he planned for the outcome to be as He wills it to be! All for His Glory Alone!
P.S. In re-reading this post it comes out much more strident (!) than was intended. . Please know that while I feel strongly about what I’m saying here, I mean it (especially toward västergötland), in a loving and Christ-like way…
As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. Gen. 50: 20
Interesting is that the same action is meant by two different persons for different purposes: Joseph’s brothers for evil, and what they did was evil, and God in his plans meant it for good. Notice that the text does not say that God was a good chess player who turned the situation in his favor. No, in the same action we see both man’s responsibility and sinful act but also God’s using the same sinful deed for good. We see both man’s hand and God’s hand involved, but in different ways.
John Piper bring Jonathan Edwards on the scene when discussing how God can be happy with a world in which is so much misery and sin, and also at the same time being grieved and angry about sin. Of course, there are limits here.
How can we say God is happy when there is so much sin and misery in the world?
Edwards did not claim to exhaust the mystery here. But he does help us find a possible way of avoiding outright contradiction while being faithful to the Scriptures. Putting it in my own words, he said that the infinite complexity of the divine mind is such that God has the capacity to look at the world through two lenses. He can look through a narrow lens or through a wide-angle lens.
When God looks at a painful or wicked event through his narrow lens, he sees the tragedy or the sin for what it is in itself and he is angered and grieved. “I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, says the LORD God” ( Ezekiel 18:32).
But when God looks at a painful or wicked event through his wide angle lens, he sees the tragedy or the sin in relation to everything leading up to it and everything flowing out from it. He sees it in all the connections and effects that form a pattern or mosaic stretching into eternity. This mosaic in all its parts-good and evil-brings him delight.Desiring God, chapter 1
Maybe the lenses are more our lenses than God’s lenses. In God there are not two wills as it may seem, but the same will which hates sin and also has it under control.
The best example in my view is Christ’s crucifixion and death. Piper says in the same chapter
God willed the crucifixion of his Son.
The sin and pain he abhorred
(through the narrow lens).
The sin-covering, death-conquering obedience
he delighted in (through the wide lens).
God had not taken pleasure in seeing his son’s suffering, but at the same time took pleasure in Christ’s suffering because by them the goal of redemption was attained. Piper continues
Who Planned The Murder Of Christ?
The clearest example that even moral evil fits into the designs of God is the crucifixion of Christ. Who would deny that the betrayal of Jesus by Judas was a morally evil act?
Yet in Acts 2:23, Peter says, “This, Jesus, ]delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.” The betrayal was sin, but it was part of God’s ordained plan. Sin did not thwart his plan or stay his hand.
Or who would say that Herod’s contempt (Luke 23:11) or Pilate’s spineless expediency (Luke 23:24) or the Jews’ “Crucify! Crucify him!” (Luke 23:21) or the Gentile soldiers’ mockery (Luke 23:36)- who would say that these were not sin? Yet Luke in Acts 4:27-28 records the prayer of the saints:
Truly in this city there were gathered together against thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel to do whatever thy hand and thy plan had predestined to take place.
People lift their hand to rebel against the Most High only to find that their rebellion is unwitting service in the wonderful designs of God. Even sin cannot frustrate the purposes of the Almighty. He himself does not commit sin, but he has decreed that there be acts which are sin-for the acts of Pilate and Herod were predestined by God’s plan.
I don’t think that we will ever exhaust the subject, but I think that what God revealed in his word about Himself is sufficient for us to trust him in our time of need.
Adding to what Gabriel wrote, can we make God responsible for sin because He created Adam free to choose between good and evil? Even if God knew beforehand that Adam would choose evil, this doesn’t make God the author of sin.
Gabriel also wrote that sin is part of Gods plan for us. I rest my case.
Put another way, God retains His perfect righteousness even if His creation chooses evil. And what’s more, He demonstrates His grace in saving sinners who deserve nothing but the consequences of their sin.
...but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8 ESV)
It is true that Jesus took the greatest suffering upon Himself. And I think you are right in saying that it helps to view the suffering of the world with the view that God is suffering with the world.
I also do not believe that God creates evil, but as I see it, this is a coherent view because I also do not believe that God would willingly permit evil to happen on earth. But for anything to happen on earth which God does not want to happen, God can not have created earth in such a way that only that which He unilateraly decrees and purposes come to pass. Saying that God does not create evil is surely at odds with the statement that “Any system which teaches that the serious intentions of God can in some cases be defeated, and that man, who is not only a creature but a sinful creature, can exercise veto power over the plans of Almighty God, is in striking contrast to the biblical idea of his immeasurable exaltation by which He is removed from all weaknesses of humanity.” If God’s intentions are always good and never evil, then His intentions must be defeated sometimes because the world we live in is sometimes good but often evil. If God’s intentions are never defeated, then it cannot be said that they are never evil and always good.
Also Adams sin, if Gods purposes are never defeated, how could Adam sin unless it was God’s purpose that Adam would in fact sin? It would be another thing to say that God intended man to live in the perfection that He created us in, but when sin came along God had to postpone His intentions for as much time as it takes for sin to play out its game until God decides that it is enough and returns us to be entierly within His original intention.
Looking at the case of Joseph, would Gods intentions have been thwarted if his brothers had NOT sold him as a slave to Egypt? Would Gods intentions have been thwarted if the wife of his first master had NOT tried to seduce him? Did Gods plan for Joseph require these evil actions or did Gods plan for Joseph work out despite of these evil actions? I suggest that Gods plan had worked even if Josephs brothers would not have sold him to slavery, God would have found another way of accomplishing His purposes.
ur meager and prideful comprehension of our infinitely incomprehensible Creator is woefully demonstrated when we lower (humanize) the great “I Am” who created us, in His image, and loves us beyond our wildest dreams. When we apply human understanding and references to God, we insult Him by putting limits on the limitless.
Did God or did God not reveal Himself to us? If God did reveal Himself to us, do you say that the limitless is limited in His capacity to fullfill His purpose of revealing Himself to us when He so choses? If God did not reveal Himself to us, all our theology isn’t worth the paper it is written on and we may just as well go do something usefull with our time.
Romans 9:20 NIV: 20On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
With all respect, in Västergötland’s text he uses the phrase “God’s intentions...”, “His intentions...”, and “God intended...”. To use the words “intention”, “intentions”, or “intended” when trying to describe the WILL of God is scripturally irrational. The reason I say this is that to apply the word “intention” to a behavior or a desire implies the possibility of being thwarted, of suffering failure! The Bible tells us that God has always existed and always will. He is the creator of all things including but not limited to our puny concept of time. God willed the universe into existence. It was perfect in His eyes, just as He… (dare I say “intended it to be”?), I don’t think so! Better said, just as He “Willed it to be”!
Isaiah 5
1Let me sing now for my well-beloved
A song of my beloved concerning His vineyard.
My well-beloved had a vineyard on a fertile hill.
2He dug it all around, removed its stones,
And planted it with the choicest vine
And He built a tower in the middle of it
And also hewed out a wine vat in it;
Then He expected it to produce good grapes,
But it produced only worthless ones.
3"And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah,
Judge between Me and My vineyard.
4"What more was there to do for My vineyard that I have not done in it?
Why, when I expected it to produce good grapes did it produce worthless ones?
5"So now let Me tell you what I am going to do to My vineyard:
I will remove its hedge and it will be consumed;
I will break down its wall and it will become trampled ground.
6"I will lay it waste;
It will not be pruned or hoed,
But briars and thorns will come up
I will also charge the clouds to rain no rain on it.”
7For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel
And the men of Judah His delightful plant
Thus He looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed;
For righteousness, but behold, a cry of distress.
Expressing expectation usually implies an intent.
Jeremiah 29 11’For I know the plans that I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.
Having plans would usually be seen as evidence of intent.
All we can say for sure is that God allowed sin to enter the world via a prideful human act and we’ve been suffering this inheritance ever since. The only cure for our suffering is faith in the Sinless One whom God sent to redeem us from the oblivion that we so surely deserve. As ugly and shameful as the human existence has been, God knew the solution even before the solution was needed! It was all laid out on His table (please excuse the human metaphor here) before we even existed! We can’t understand it! We don’t need to understand it! This is where the John 3:16 faith comes in to assure and comfort us. What is happening MUST happen as he planned for the outcome to be as He wills it to be! All for His Glory Alone!
Did God allow sin to enter the world or did God plan and purpose sin to enter the world via a prideful human act?
There is only one cure but is this cure aviable for everyone or is it only aviable for a limited elect?
The God who so loved the world, that He gave His begotten Son, so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, has this God made the world in such a way that those who are covered by “wohever believes” are an elect and limited group of people by default or does every human ever born have the same opportunity to be the one who believes?
P.S. In re-reading this post it comes out much more strident (!) than was intended. . Please know that while I feel strongly about what I’m saying here, I mean it (especially toward västergötland), in a loving and Christ-like way…
Yes, let us strive to genial even in our disagreement.
Gabriel also wrote that sin is part of Gods plan for us. I rest my case.
Is this all you have to say after you accused us of making God the author of sin? Without proving me wrong in the way I interpreted the texts I offered is another example of making naked affirmations, without backing them up with proofs, biblical proofs.
. Please know that while I feel strongly about what I’m saying here, I mean it (especially toward västergötland), in a loving and Christ-like way… 