Theology Question For Calvinist/Reformed Members

[Arial]

Sure, that works too. But I mean to imply that God "invented" (for lack of a more to-the-point word) very reality. All fact is his bailiwick, there is no fact outside of his "decree" (plan). Fact is not a stand-alone principle. It is God-made, and God-sustained.

God does not come upon an already existing fact, principle or set of principles to which he, like his creatures, must fit and according to which he must operate. Fact and very existence operates by his decree.

True, and names of animals is not a creation. Names are given, not created.

 

[GeneZ]

Sure, that works too. But I mean to imply that God "invented" (for lack of a more to-the-point word) very reality. All fact is his bailiwick, there is no fact outside of his "decree" (plan). Fact is not a stand-alone principle. It is God-made, and God-sustained.

God does not come upon an already existing fact, principle or set of principles to which he, like his creatures, must fit and according to which he must operate. Fact and very existence operates by his decree.

His decree was God simplifying and the narrowing down and eliminating all the possible ways men could choose if allowed forever to keep trying to right themselves in some way outside of accepting truth....

"Always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7​

God's decree narrows down what is to be reality, down to determining how we will always wish to think.

Otherwise?
Without His decrees?
Something like the Garden of Eden would be replayed over and over until no more lies against the truth could be invented as to prove the truth not to be true.

God's decrees is God's efficiency manifested in having reality to reveal our final conclusion as to avoid endless thoughts and actions of men as to determine what a man is really made of.

For example...

If God did not decree that a certain man would choose from a certain number of women for taking a wife?
Be it one or five? Some men would be forever divorcing and choosing new ones because he could not find
his right woman which only comes by God's grace.

God's decrees avoided a potential for gigantic heaped up messes for the unfolding of time.
God's decree avoids endless redundancy of men that could have been.
For God determined what was perfectly needed to reveal who and what a person really is..

grace and peace ..............

 

[GeneZ]

True, and names of animals is not a creation. Names are given, not created.

In Adam's case the names had to be created by Adam's mind.
The names became what Adam "called" them.

Even concepts (though invisible) are created.

The newly created animals had no designated names.
Up until a short time before Adam naming them those animals did not even exist.

Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens ​

and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living ​

creature, that was its name." Gen 2:19​

Adam was "creative" with a creative mind...( in the image of God no less. )

grace and peace ...........

 

[Arial]

In Adam's case the names had to be created by Adam.

Or maybe he called them what they were. People before the fall had uncorrupted brains. We have gotten progressively dumber. But still, a name is not a creation, and I suggest you ponder that awhile and reevaluate your definition of what it means to be created or to create. Concepts are concepts, ideas are ideas, and from these, things can be created, but they are not the creation itself. So names aren't created.

 

[GeneZ]

Or maybe he called them what they were. People before the fall had uncorrupted brains. We have gotten progressively dumber. But still, a name is not a creation, and I suggest you ponder that awhile and reevaluate your definition of what it means to be created or to create. Concepts are concepts, ideas are ideas, and from these, things can be created, but they are not the creation itself. So names aren't created.

5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Genesis 2:5-7​

​

God had created all the plant life before they appeared manifested.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.​

It says... God saw.
The thought was the creative act!

God created with a thought first.. and, then the creation appeared later.


Before what we read became manifested in Genesis 2?
It says that God had already created it in full!

​

Its not as simple as we sometimes wish... and to be done with it.

grace and peace ................

 

[Arial]

It says... God saw.
The thought was the creative act!

God saw that it was good is what that Scripture says.He saw after it was created.

Before what we read became manifested in Genesis 2?
It says that God had already created it in full!

That isn't what it says at all. Gen 2 simply gives more detail.

But listen, I know you are not going to move from your position that names are a creation. And I know that you will continue ad nauseum with the nonsense as though it were sense. If you didn't it would be admitting that you had actually been wrong about something and I guess that is something you are not able to live with, or at least have anyone know. That is a very common characteristic of mankind.

So as far as I am concerned, the back and forth over a triviality is over.

 

[GeneZ]

So as far as I am concerned, the back and forth over a triviality is over.

Triviality? ....

That will be decided when we are evaluated.

 

[makesends]

His decree was God simplifying and the narrowing down and eliminating all the possible ways men could choose if allowed forever to keep trying to right themselves in some way outside of accepting truth....

​

"Always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7​

God's decree narrows down what is to be reality, down to determining how we will always wish to think.

Otherwise?
Without His decrees?
Something like the Garden of Eden would be replayed over and over until no more lies against the truth could be invented as to prove the truth not to be true.

God's decrees is God's efficiency manifested in having reality to reveal our final conclusion as to avoid endless thoughts and actions of men as to determine what a man is really made of.

For example...

If God did not decree that a certain man would choose from a certain number of women for taking a wife?
Be it one or five? Some men would be forever divorcing and choosing new ones because he could not find
his right woman which only comes by God's grace.

God's decrees avoided a potential for gigantic heaped up messes for the unfolding of time.
God's decree avoids endless redundancy of men that could have been.
For God determined what was perfectly needed to reveal who and what a person really is..

grace and peace ..............

You haven't answered:
makesends said:
Can you show me fact that came to be, apart from God's creating?

 

[makesends]

His decree was God simplifying and the narrowing down and eliminating all the possible ways men could choose if allowed forever to keep trying to right themselves in some way outside of accepting truth....

​

"Always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7​

God's decree narrows down what is to be reality, down to determining how we will always wish to think.

Otherwise?
Without His decrees?
Something like the Garden of Eden would be replayed over and over until no more lies against the truth could be invented as to prove the truth not to be true.

God's decrees is God's efficiency manifested in having reality to reveal our final conclusion as to avoid endless thoughts and actions of men as to determine what a man is really made of.

For example...

If God did not decree that a certain man would choose from a certain number of women for taking a wife?
Be it one or five? Some men would be forever divorcing and choosing new ones because he could not find
his right woman which only comes by God's grace.

God's decrees avoided a potential for gigantic heaped up messes for the unfolding of time.
God's decree avoids endless redundancy of men that could have been.
For God determined what was perfectly needed to reveal who and what a person really is..

grace and peace ..............

huh???

 

[GeneZ]

You haven't answered:
makesends said:
Can you show me fact that came to be, apart from God's creating?

God knowing all things has included and integrated facts into the creation...

Facts are usually the defining of something found in the creation.
The fact that you asked such a question was not created by God.
Yet, when God created you to have volition, in His omniscience He knew you would ask.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
You haven't answered:
makesends said:
Can you show me fact that came to be, apart from God's creating?

God knowing all things has included and integrated facts into the creation...

Facts are usually the defining of something found in the creation.
The fact that you asked such a question was not created by God.
Yet, when God created you to have volition, in His omniscience He knew you would ask.

Show me how that follows, logically, that there can be things the Creator knows, yet in no way caused. Is not all fact within creation caused? Is there any fact or principle that is self-existent, besides First Cause Himself?

I asked you to show me fact, or even A fact, that came to be, apart from God's creating. Your answer doesn't do that. It only asserts, but does not show how it is so.

You said, "The fact that you asked such a question was not created by God." If not caused by God, then how did it even happen? Did I cause it? If I did, was not I caused to exist by God? —If I was caused by God to exist, then what I do is caused by God to be done.

 

[GeneZ]

makesends said:
You haven't answered:
makesends said:
Can you show me fact that came to be, apart from God's creating?

Show me how that follows, logically, that there can be things the Creator knows, yet in no way caused. Is not all fact within creation caused? Is there any fact or principle that is self-existent, besides First Cause Himself?

I asked you to show me fact, or even A fact, that came to be, apart from God's creating. Your answer doesn't do that. It only asserts, but does not show how it is so.

You said, "The fact that you asked such a question was not created by God." If not caused by God, then how did it even happen? Did I cause it? If I did, was not I caused to exist by God? —If I was caused by God to exist, then what I do is caused by God to be done.

God created you to be a pain in the neck.... And, that's a fact.

 

[makesends]

God created you to be a pain in the neck.... And, that's a fact.

Hahahaha!

...or, wait a minute! Did you just hurt my feelings? —Because if you hurt my feelings, and *I* find out about it.....!!!

 

[Arial]

Triviality? ....

That will be decided when we are evaluated.

You think bickering back and forth as you try to maintain your righteness (even if perchance you see that what was said about it actually makes sense and is true, concerning names not being a creation) is not trivial?

That's what happens I guess when one thinks they have to know everything, that they can know everything, and even that they do know everything.

 

[Arial]

If I had to guess, I'd say you were converted under synergistic theology, in which Man seems to be the primary mover;

Yes. I think many, maybe most, Reformed/Calvinists were. Even Sproul. Which is a good thing really as we come to it knowing both sides of the story. Which the opponents of R/C do not, and so usually are making straw man arguments.

On re-reading this, it seems disjointed. Sorry. I'm trying to say that while you or I may not be able to prove it doctrinally, some of this perspective SHOULD drive doctrine, or doctrinal meaning, (and I can't help but wonder if some of it used to be, but meanings and assumptions have migrated by modern mindsets), until what we read even the confessions and creeds to say implies to us something less monergistic when it was not originally intended to be that way. (I hope that makes sense to read.)

Oh, I agree, agree, and agree.Philosophical meanderings must come out of the doctrine we already have come to understand, not the other way around.

As to meanings and assumptions of a modern mindset from what they were when penned long ago, causing confusion and misunderstandings, amen to that. Often Reformed writers use the old meanings too. That is one thing I like about Sproul. He clarifies where this exists.

I remember the first time I read the WCF, and it was early on in my study of Reformed theology, I had a terrible time understanding the meaning of much of it, because I was reading through the mindset of the modern watering down and boundary blurring definitions. I read it now, and it is clear. (The same difficulty exists in the KJV in my opinion.) As one example is the text translated, "rightly divide the word of God" which some modern translations still use. That word translated rightly divide was actually an actual agricultural word meaning cut a straight furrow.

—When I consider that this all (the universe, and all fact) started with GOD, and is for his sake and by his purposes, then the Bible starts to open up and life warms up. I can't help but smile.

It can't do otherwise, for that is the theology from which all else cuts a straight furrow.

 

[GeneZ]

You think bickering back and forth as you try to maintain your righteness (even if perchance you see that what was said about it actually makes sense and is true, concerning names not being a creation) is not trivial?

That's what happens I guess when one thinks they have to know everything, that they can know everything, and even that they do know everything.

I was not bickering..... You threw that into the batter as it was being kneaded for making some wholesome bread.

 

[GeneZ]

Question....


What is the forbidden "shut case" issue concerning Calvinists, who insist that God can not arrange for for man to choose to believe in God, and then Christ?

Why is it to be impossible for God to arrange such a moment in time to take place?
Thus, arranging for a display in time for the reason God chose us before the foundation of the earth?

 

[makesends]

Question....


What is the forbidden "shut case" issue concerning Calvinists, who insist that God can not arrange for for man to choose to believe in God, and then Christ?

Why is it to be impossible for God to arrange such a moment in time to take place?
Thus, arranging for a display in time for the reason God chose us before the foundation of the earth?

Whom are you quoting, and from whom do you expect an answer?

 

[GeneZ]

Whom are you quoting, and from whom do you expect an answer?

Was not quoting anyone directly. Just picking up on a general theme in Calvinist thinking.

Anybody who thinks they have the answer would suffice..

Here is the question again... I shall rephrase it slightly.


What is the issue concerning Calvinists, who insist that God can not arrange for for man to choose to believe in God, and then Christ?

 

[makesends]

Was not quoting anyone directly. Just picking up on a general theme in Calvinist thinking.

Anybody who thinks they have the answer would suffice..

Here is the question again... I shall rephrase it slightly.


What is the issue concerning Calvinists, who insist that God can not arrange for for man to choose to believe in God, and then Christ?

I meant, are you asking someone what their problem is with Calvinism? Or are you asking Calvinists what their problem is with the the notion of God arranging for man to choose to believe in God, and then Christ?

God does arrange it, by raising the dead to life.