Coming Against Reformed Theology

[Arial]

@Mercy_Shown

When Reformed theology is attacked on forums, I can't help but think of the church at Corinth and Paul's first letter of admonition to them. Before he can even begin to deal with the specifics he must defend himself against their immaturity and unChristian behavior, and divisiveness. There was infighting over who followed who. 1 Cor 1:10-13 I appeal to you brothers, by the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, that there be no divisions among you,but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgement. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you,my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow "Cephas," or "I follow Christ."

When Reformed theology is attacked eventually, if not at the very beginning, an accusation of following Calvin is made, followed by an attack on his person, which then by extension falls on the Reformed collectively. And as a counter to following Calvin it is sometimes said "I follow the Bible!" as though they had no teachers. Which is the very same thing we see in the above quote from 1 Cor.

The implication in the accusation of following Calvin is that all that is in Reformed theology, was the invention of Calvin alone, when in fact it began long before his lifetime, took fire in the lifetime of Luther, and expanded to different countries during Calvin's lifetime and beyond. Calvin was a proliferate writer and teacher with the precision of the lawyers mind, but his writings of the Reformation era are not the only ones we have.

This reductionism, and the further reduction to TULIP, have made the theology a likely and easy target, given the looseness of doctrinal teaching in a great many of our churches. In addition the fact that one form of free will or another, in choosing Christ, and that choosing being the basis on which salvation is said to be applied, it has become next to impossible for today's believers who began their Christian walk in that doctrine, to accept anything else or even understand it. They have been counting on their choice. So they recoil and then attack the doctrines expressed in TULIP with no knowledge of the theology that is Reformed theology. Doctrines are one thing, theology another. And in Reformed theology, the key word here is theology. It is from a view of God that the doctrines in it come. It is God centered.

The view of God in Reformed theology is quite different from the view of God that is found in non-Reformed. It has, in fact, been said in a post that we cannot learn who God is from the OT, because there are contradictions of who He is in the OT. What was pointed to as contradictions is His sovereignty and His omniscience, even His being immutable, being contradicted in verses that say He "remembers", "regretted," places where He appears to change His mind etc. And these types of arguments are used to argue against Reformed theology's view of God in arriving at the doctrines in TULIP--the doctrines of grace in RT.

What happens is two theologies (two different views of God), attempt to reconcile or refute doctrine. One adheres strictly to its theology to interpret scripture----who God says He is in both testaments, as they are both the same God. The other side simply debates doctrine without a Bible based theology, but is a simply a view of God primarily based on the NT covenant relationship, (though it is possible they do not realize this) but not on who God actually is as self revealed. Instead of recognizing that the relationship God has with believers in the NT, is a covenant relationship, and that is why it sometimes appears to be that God changed. For instance there is belief in His omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, sovereignty, but then the interpretations of scripture given by those refuting RT do not consider it, but run ahead to what feels right or what they already believe. Instead, all the complex questions are resolved by their perception of God, such as God would never violate man's free will, therefore He must have sovereignly chosen to give Him free will in choosing, whether by equal grace to understand scripture is given to all and then can be accepted or rejected, or by denying the total depravity doctrine, and that is why not all people are saved. The rebuttal to Reformed theology becomes, if God chose who to save and did not give everyone equal opportunity to become saved, that would be evil and not love, therefore He did not do that. All kinds of things are manufactured to get around the facts of scripture as interpreted through who God is that are considered alien to their image of God. None of it based on what God actually says about Himself, but who He is imagined to be.

When it is said God ordains all things, up comes the accusation that would make God a monster who ordains that ----go to any worst case scenario, from your neighbor being hit by a bus, to a tornado sweeping through a community, to Hitler. Ignore all that we see in the OT that we don't like, and there would be something wrong with us if we did like it, that shows God doing as He pleases to whom He pleases. Always choosing and always for His purposes. The focus is on how His purposes affect us, as if that were the whole picture. As though we are the center of God. And the certain hope clung to is--"I will go to heaven, not hell."

So pick the worst case scenario and say if God ordained that to happen, then He is a monster. That is intended to be thrown at Reformed theology and those who agree with it to whatever degree, but it is an arrow aimed straight at God. And it is saying, in essence, that if that is who God is, I would never worship Him. Never for a second pausing to consider the one who says it may be wrong? His book is filled with His declarations of the elect, the chosen, the ordained to salvation, in regards to the believer.

But that charge against Reformed theology fails to solve the issue, for whatever worst case scenario is used, still happened under the all seeing eye of God, who has the power to stop whatever it is, and stands back watching, not lifting a finger, lest He violate the will of the creature. And also is forgotten that it was we who rebelled against God and do so minute by minute, quite pleased with ourselves as we wallow in the mire of sin. And all that evil is a direct result of that. And for the Christian we forget that we are still living in this fallen world and its effects, forgotten is the counsel of God that says: Romans 8:16-25 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs---heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies, For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

Big Picture!!

I do not feel equipped to do an adequate explanation of all that is involved in God's decrees and ordinations in Reformed theology when it comes to every specific, such as a question such as Did God ordain that Hitler would kill millions of Jews? Or, did God ordain a particular individual to be murdered? I have my own views on such things and could even tackle it, but I do not consider that I have the articulation skills to do it justice. So I welcome input on that from those who do and I know there are some on the forum who do have those skills.

 

[Carbon]

@Mercy_Shown

When Reformed theology is attacked on forums, I can't help but think of the church at Corinth and Paul's first letter of admonition to them. Before he can even begin to deal with the specifics he must defend himself against their immaturity and unChristian behavior, and divisiveness. There was infighting over who followed who. 1 Cor 1:10-13 I appeal to you brothers, by the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, that there be no divisions among you,but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgement. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you,my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow "Cephas," or "I follow Christ."

When Reformed theology is attacked eventually, if not at the very beginning, an accusation of following Calvin is made, followed by an attack on his person, which then by extension falls on the Reformed collectively. And as a counter to following Calvin it is sometimes said "I follow the Bible!" as though they had no teachers. Which is the very same thing we see in the above quote from 1 Cor.

The implication in the accusation of following Calvin is that all that is in Reformed theology, was the invention of Calvin alone, when in fact it began long before his lifetime, took fire in the lifetime of Luther, and expanded to different countries during Calvin's lifetime and beyond. Calvin was a proliferate writer and teacher with the precision of the lawyers mind, but his writings of the Reformation era are not the only ones we have.

This reductionism, and the further reduction to TULIP, have made the theology a likely and easy target, given the looseness of doctrinal teaching in a great many of our churches. In addition the fact that one form of free will or another, in choosing Christ, and that choosing being the basis on which salvation is said to be applied, it has become next to impossible for today's believers who began their Christian walk in that doctrine, to accept anything else or even understand it. They have been counting on their choice. So they recoil and then attack the doctrines expressed in TULIP with no knowledge of the theology that is Reformed theology. Doctrines are one thing, theology another. And in Reformed theology, the key word here is theology. It is from a view of God that the doctrines in it come. It is God centered.

The view of God in Reformed theology is quite different from the view of God that is found in non-Reformed. It has, in fact, been said in a post that we cannot learn who God is from the OT, because there are contradictions of who He is in the OT. What was pointed to as contradictions is His sovereignty and His omniscience, even His being immutable, being contradicted in verses that say He "remembers", "regretted," places where He appears to change His mind etc. And these types of arguments are used to argue against Reformed theology's view of God in arriving at the doctrines in TULIP--the doctrines of grace in RT.

What happens is two theologies (two different views of God), attempt to reconcile or refute doctrine. One adheres strictly to its theology to interpret scripture----who God says He is in both testaments, as they are both the same God. The other side simply debates doctrine without a Bible based theology, but is a simply a view of God primarily based on the NT covenant relationship, (though it is possible they do not realize this) but not on who God actually is as self revealed. Instead of recognizing that the relationship God has with believers in the NT, is a covenant relationship, and that is why it sometimes appears to be that God changed. For instance there is belief in His omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, sovereignty, but then the interpretations of scripture given by those refuting RT do not consider it, but run ahead to what feels right or what they already believe. Instead, all the complex questions are resolved by their perception of God, such as God would never violate man's free will, therefore He must have sovereignly chosen to give Him free will in choosing, whether by equal grace to understand scripture is given to all and then can be accepted or rejected, or by denying the total depravity doctrine, and that is why not all people are saved. The rebuttal to Reformed theology becomes, if God chose who to save and did not give everyone equal opportunity to become saved, that would be evil and not love, therefore He did not do that. All kinds of things are manufactured to get around the facts of scripture as interpreted through who God is that are considered alien to their image of God. None of it based on what God actually says about Himself, but who He is imagined to be.

When it is said God ordains all things, up comes the accusation that would make God a monster who ordains that ----go to any worst case scenario, from your neighbor being hit by a bus, to a tornado sweeping through a community, to Hitler. Ignore all that we see in the OT that we don't like, and there would be something wrong with us if we did like it, that shows God doing as He pleases to whom He pleases. Always choosing and always for His purposes. The focus is on how His purposes affect us, as if that were the whole picture. As though we are the center of God. And the certain hope clung to is--"I will go to heaven, not hell."

So pick the worst case scenario and say if God ordained that to happen, then He is a monster. That is intended to be thrown at Reformed theology and those who agree with it to whatever degree, but it is an arrow aimed straight at God. And it is saying, in essence, that if that is who God is, I would never worship Him. Never for a second pausing to consider the one who says it may be wrong? His book is filled with His declarations of the elect, the chosen, the ordained to salvation, in regards to the believer.

But that charge against Reformed theology fails to solve the issue, for whatever worst case scenario is used, still happened under the all seeing eye of God, who has the power to stop whatever it is, and stands back watching, not lifting a finger, lest He violate the will of the creature. And also is forgotten that it was we who rebelled against God and do so minute by minute, quite pleased with ourselves as we wallow in the mire of sin. And all that evil is a direct result of that. And for the Christian we forget that we are still living in this fallen world and its effects, forgotten is the counsel of God that says: Romans 8:16-25 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs---heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies, For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

Big Picture!!

I do not feel equipped to do an adequate explanation of all that is involved in God's decrees and ordinations in Reformed theology when it comes to every specific, such as a question such as Did God ordain that Hitler would kill millions of Jews? Or, did God ordain a particular individual to be murdered? I have my own views on such things and could even tackle it, but I do not consider that I have the articulation skills to do it justice. So I welcome input on that from those who do and I know there are some on the forum who do have those skills.

Interesting thread.

I'm not very skilled in most things. But I don't mind sharing some thoughts.

I believe God created vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath for His glory.
And what if God decided to judge and kill millions of Jews? It's the holocaust that we moderns are most familiar with I suppose. But there are other people and nations that were wiped out, the OT teaches of some, but I can't recall them. So what if God decided to judge some people or nations now or at whatever time in history? Can He not do as he pleases? And which people or nation does not deserve it? It's only because God is merciful that anyone exists.

 

[Carbon]

Interesting thread.

I'm not very skilled in most things. But I don't mind sharing some thoughts.

I believe God created vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath for His glory.
And what if God decided to judge and kill millions of Jews? It's the holocaust that we moderns are most familiar with I suppose. But there are other people and nations that were wiped out, the OT teaches of some, but I can't recall them. So what if God decided to judge some people or nations now or at whatever time in history? Can He not do as he pleases? And which people or nation does not deserve it? It's only because God is merciful that anyone exists.

Consider the World Trade Center and the many who died. Was that ordained by God? I believe so.

I believe one of the biggest problems today, especially in America is individualism. Notice everything is always about me. This country is full of Narcissists.
God wouldn't do anything to hurt people or me we all say. It's really not about God, it's about ourselves. We don't know how sinful sin is and what we deserve. We do not understand grace.

If another country invaded America and captured, tortured, and, murdered 50 million people, technically every one of them would deserve it. We are all guilty and deserving of judgment and hell. It's not about us. Just who do we think we are?

And it's only because of what Christ has done for his elect given him by the Father (vessels of mercy) that we have been redeemed and will spend eternity with Him. Amazing grace!

 

[Arial]

Interesting thread.

I'm not very skilled in most things. But I don't mind sharing some thoughts.

I believe God created vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath for His glory.
And what if God decided to judge and kill millions of Jews? It's the holocaust that we moderns are most familiar with I suppose. But there are other people and nations that were wiped out, the OT teaches of some, but I can't recall them. So what if God decided to judge some people or nations now or at whatever time in history? Can He not do as he pleases? And which people or nation does not deserve it? It's only because God is merciful that anyone exists.

I agree. In fact we are experience judgement imo all the time. That is the chaos and evil we live with. But it is not a personal judgement. We look on things such as the holocaust, and murders, rapes, cruelty, with horror and grief, and well we should. A hurricane wiping out a community and killing many, is not a judgement on the community or any individual. But we are in no position to judge God.

Personally I think that is what the passage I quoted from Rom 8 is referring to when it says all creation groans and it was subjected to futility by God. That is a judgment. I hate the destruction of forests, the slaughter of animals, the cruelty inflicted on animal, the paving over of God's glorious land, high rises, giant windmills killing birds and desecrating open land. Creation groaning. But we wait with patience for the new creation in Christ, that we have already become, but also have not yet become.

 

[CrowCross]

So what if God decided to judge some people or nations now or at whatever time in history? Can He not do as he pleases?

I agree. In fact we are experience judgement imo all the time.

Have you looked into this "theory" at all?

 

[Arial]

Have you looked into this "theory" at all?
View attachment 762

??

 

[CrowCross]

??

I was thinking about starting a thread on this in prophecy.

Here's a video that explains some of it. Some of it makes you go hmmmmmmm wile some of it makes you go eh.

 

[Carbon]

Have you looked into this "theory" at all?
View attachment 762

I don’t get it. ??

 

[Carbon]

??

Exactly

 

[Arial]

I was thinking about starting a thread on this in prophecy.

Here's a video that explains some of it. Some of it makes you go hmmmmmmm wile some of it makes you go eh.

I have started viewing it but can't finish right now. So far very interesting----and I'm not sure. But it does make a person think. It would make a good thread. Go for it.

 

[His clay]

But that charge against Reformed theology fails to solve the issue, for whatever worst case scenario is used, still happened under the all seeing eye of God, who has the power to stop whatever it is, and stands back watching, not lifting a finger, lest He violate the will of the creature. And also is forgotten that it was we who rebelled against God and do so minute by minute, quite pleased with ourselves as we wallow in the mire of sin. And all that evil is a direct result of that. And for the Christian we forget that we are still living in this fallen world and its effects, forgotten is the counsel of God that says: Romans 8:16-25 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs---heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies, For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

"But that charge against Reformed theology fails to solve the issue, for whatever worst case scenario is used, still happened under the all seeing eye of God, who has the power to stop whatever it is, and stands back watching, not lifting a finger, lest He violate the will of the creature."

Under the paradigm of the autonomous objector who stands in judgment over God, which paradigm many anti-Calvinist objectors utilize, the moral outrage should also fall upon the libertarian freedom advocate. The use of force to rescue is often exceedingly moral. The parent, who sees their kid in the road and an oncoming car, rushes over to forcibly take the kid out of harms way. It is precisely the parent, who respects the libertarian freedom of the child, who is immoral for not rescuing the child.

Again, the person who has drowned and is unconscious, who didn't ask to be resuscitated using CPR, typically does not have a problem with the lifeguard who did not ask permission for saving the person. Conversely, we would be appalled at the lifeguard if he did nothing because the person used their libertarian freedom to get into trouble, drown, and did not ask ok the use of force for his rescue. In this case, the lifeguard's passivity would be immoral.

Again, all of this points out that the false position of the autonomous moral objector leads to serious problems with the libertarian freedom viewpoint, where God tries some stuff to rescue, but He never violates their libertarian freedom.

In my view and many Calvinists viewpoint, the autonomous moral objector position is simply an example of the fallen prideful mindset. God is God, and man is not. Case closed. One can gripe and badmouth all he/she wants, but in the end God is still God; and He is the judge over the griping. The roles are absolutely never reversed.

Simplified: the autonomous moral objection fails its own criteria and it fails to adhere to God being God.

(I had to edit the opening post to keep the word count down, so I could actually post a response.)

 

[CrowCross]

I have started viewing it but can't finish right now. So far very interesting----and I'm not sure. But it does make a person think. It would make a good thread. Go for it.

I'll have to do that....I think this may not be the direction you intended as I was answering the thread from a judgement position.

 

[Arial]

Under the paradigm of the autonomous objector who stands in judgment over God, which paradigm many anti-Calvinist objectors utilize, the moral outrage should also fall upon the libertarian freedom advocate. The use of force to rescue is often exceedingly moral. The parent, who sees their kid in the road and an oncoming car, rushes over to forcibly take the kid out of harms way. It is precisely the parent, who respects the libertarian freedom of the child, who is immoral for not rescuing the child.

Not only that but the libertarian freedom advocate would not even think to call it force, but the grace of God. And they would not be morally outraged. The child would never think his will had been violated, and if he did, would be grateful. In another thread, a particular passage of Romans was attempted to be interpreted in relationship to who God is, rather than how the other person made Him to be from the presupposition that God gave everyone enough grace to decide if they wanted to be saved or not. "Those He foreknew, He also predestined---." So of course God's ordaining to salvation in respect to the passage came up.

As soon as that word appeared, the other party presented the scenario (a very common occurrence) of a little girl who wet the bed so her stepfather stuffed her in a trash bag and threw her in the dumpster. And did God ordain that? It would make him a monster. It was all the opportunity he needed to shift the focus away from a position on the scripture that it was obvious he could not biblically defend. And where was the moral outrage directed? At God. Not the stepfather.

The thing is imo with free will in any form as it pertains to salvation and choosing of their own free will without regeneration, the position is taken and never thought through. And when someone thinks it through to it natural conclusion for them, they still disagree. A series of oxymorons, such as "A person an lose eternal life." "Jesus paid for the sins of the whole world, but not really--only if you choose for Him to." "You get born again by choosing to believe but you don't precipitate your own birth." "God could sovereignly decide to give grace as an offer so we all have an equal chance, therefore He did do that."

In my view and many Calvinists viewpoint, the autonomous moral objector position is simply an example of the fallen prideful mindset. God is God, and man is not. Case closed. One can gripe and badmouth all he/she wants, but in the end God is still God; and He is the judge over the griping. The roles are absolutely never reversed.

I have long thought that is precisely at the root of it. That and fear because they have all their Christian lives been trusting in the choice they made and they would rather do that than to actually trust God. But a person can make a choice, can "invite Jesus into their life" so they won't go to hell, and never actually know Him. Just the loaves and fishes.

 

[Arial]

I'll have to do that....I think this may not be the direction you intended as I was answering the thread from a judgement position.

I still am not very far in it, but I can see where it might go to what @Carbon has said about judgement. But I think it deserves its own venue.

 

[Carbon]

I was thinking about starting a thread on this in prophecy.

Here's a video that explains some of it. Some of it makes you go hmmmmmmm wile some of it makes you go eh.

If God was speaking, do I think I would know it? If He was speaking to me, of course, I would know it.

If it was by signs? Then no. God communicates with us through His word.

 

[Arial]

If God was speaking, do I think I would know it? If He was speaking to me, of course, I would know it.

If it was by signs? Then no. God communicates with us through His word.

It tend to agree, though there is a sense in which He is always speaking through His creation. But I tend to think it is not a direct message and we are not to try and read the stars and planets--or tea leaves.

The sense in which He is speaking is that there is not a speck of sand that its not exactly where God intends it to be, and as all things are held together in Christ, all things are connected and purposeful and doing something. Nothing is accidental, not even the day and hour of our birth.

 

[CrowCross]

If God was speaking, do I think I would know it? If He was speaking to me, of course, I would know it.

If it was by signs? Then no. God communicates with us through His word.

You may be right, keeping in mind the bible calls for signs in the heavens.

Gen 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish between the day and the night, and let them be signs to mark the seasons and days and years.

Dan 6:27 He delivers and rescues; he works signs and wonders in heaven and on earth, he who has saved Daniel from the power of the lions.

Luke 2:11 There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven.

 

[Carbon]

You may be right, keeping in mind the bible calls for signs in the heavens.

Gen 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish between the day and the night, and let them be signs to mark the seasons and days and years.

Dan 6:27 He delivers and rescues; he works signs and wonders in heaven and on earth, he who has saved Daniel from the power of the lions.

Luke 2:11 There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven.

The same guy that says God is talking to us also said, we were born in these end times because God trusts us.

Really? And in which way and with what does God trust us?

 

[CrowCross]

The same guy that says God is talking to us also said, we were born in these end times because God trusts us.

Really? And in which way and with what does God trust us?

I'm not quite sure what your trying to say...but, my point is the sun, moon stars snd such can be a sign from God.

 

[Carbon]

I'm not quite sure what your trying to say...

Didn't you listen to the video?