The Theology in Calvinism

[Arial]

Theology of course is the study of God. In debates against Calvinism accusations are hurled against the theology and by extension apply to those who believe it. It makes God evil. It is horrific. It violates God's character. It is a false god and those who believe it worship a false God. God is love so He would never choose some for salvation and not all as that is unfair and unjust. It has even been said that God is love and love is a primary attribute and the others such as justice and sovereignty play second fiddle as secondary attributes to love.

Let's look at that for a moment. Perhaps it is taken in isolation from 1 John 4:8 "because God is love." If we look at the entire context of 7-21 we see that John is not giving love as a primary attribute of God that overrides all others, but that he is giving instruction to his readers on how they are to treat one another. Because God has first loved us (the new covenant community) and showed us His love for us in sending His Son, and that we only love Him because He first loved us in this blessing, we are to reflect this love of God for each other.

God's attribute of love shows us how we are to behave, and leave retribution and justice of wrongs done to us to Him. That is His wheelhouse not ours. (Deut 32:35; Romans 12:19; Heb 10:30; Ps 94:1 O Lord, God of vengeance, God of vengeance, shine forth."; 1 Peter 2:21-23.

In Calvinism all its doctrines arrive out of the use of the whole counsel of God, starting with "In the beginning God---" It considers everything that God has said about Himself in both the OT and the NT. It takes all of the pieces of the puzzle, all the clear teachings of the scriptures, without looking for a way to alter what is clearly said to fit something that will violate what God says about Himself. It lets scriptures that are clear on a subject interpret those that are less clear on the same subject. It puts all the pieces together to arrive at a uniform and consistent theology and doctrines that fit those in the Bible. It does not ignore things that human nature may naturally recoil against.

Irregardless of how one feels about it or whether or not the believe it, this is what it does.

On the other hand, those who are against Calvinism often ignore those things they don't like that God says and shows about Himself in favor of the inconsistency of what feels more right to them from their own concept of God. Who they think He is and want Him to be. They seem to feel that God needs to be defended. Saying that love, for instance, is a primary attribute of God that overrules or surpasses other lesser attributes such as justice, is a complete distortion of the nature of God who says He is the Creator and ruler, sovereign over all His creation.
Psalm 115:3 Our God is in the heavens; He does all that He pleases.
Dan 4:35 All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and He does according to His will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay His hand or say to Him, "What have you done?"

The God who says He is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, the beginning and the end. Who says He is self existent and eternal. Who says "I Am that I AM."

Who says He is just. Job 31:17 "Shall one who hates justice rule? And will you condemn the righteous mighty One---"
Luke 18:7 will not God bring about justice for is elect who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them?
2 Thes 1:6-8 God is just. He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with His powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

Can it be said then that God has primary and secondary attributes and love rules over them?

The problem arises when we as finite beings attempt to define the infinite by our limited experience and vision. That is man up to God not God down to man theology. God sees the whole picture and the whole plan and all the details all at once. We do not. Therefore we are incapable of seeing the working together of all His attributes, in complete harmony and unity from our perspective and therefore should not stand in judgment of Him, calling Him unjust and unloving if He were to violate our sense of love and justice. And in doing so, tell Him who He is, or who He must be, and How he does,, or should do, anything and everything.

 

[civic]

I noticed you left Jesus teaching on love from the gospels out . Any reason you left out God in the flesh teachings on the topic of loving the world ( all sinners ) loving your enemies , praying for them , turning the other cheek , giving them the coat off your back , not returning evil for evil but blessing them with your words ?

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

God is Love. In love, the Father sent the Son on our behalf to be the perfect sacrifice for sin. We Love because He first loved us and sent His Son as 1 John 4:19 tells us.

We must understand how God's attributes all work in harmony together, not in opposition to each other. God's attributes and character flow from His love—for God is love.

God being love has nothing to do with His creation. That is secondary. God is love, and that love is perfect, lacking nothing within His Triune nature as God. Love, by definition, has to be expressed with another, which is why a unitarian god cannot be love. Love requires another to share and express that love, and it is what we see with the Triune God. God is love before anyone/anything existed.

Before creation, there was no sin. There was no judgment, wrath, mercy, grace, and justice. Why? Because those are God's secondary attributes concerning the creation and the fall. God's love is a primary attribute, like Holy is a primary one. Everything about God flows from His being Love which includes His secondary attributes, which were not in use until the creation and the fall.

Lets examine how this works in conjunction with Gods sovereignty and His love. God is sovereign and also love. Both sovereignty and love as they intersect with God have been revealed plainly to us by God in His word. He has done this both through his word and his works. And God has sworn never to change for He is Immutable.

God's sovereignty is never exercised in violation of his love. His love is very everlasting, for God is love. The love of God has not the slightest shadow of variation, and it, not his sovereignty, is the basis upon which his moral standards rest. Any promotion of any doctrine that represents God as acting in a way that violates his love appealing to the fact that He is sovereign is found nowhere in the pages of scripture.

The fact that God can do something is not a justification for Him doing it. The fact that God can damn everyone without a reason is not an argument for justifying teaching that he does as in the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination. All that He can do is restricted by the standard that God values most which is His love. If it will violate love, God will not and cannot do it for that would be contrary to His nature and character as a loving God. And if it will violate love then it is not right. God cannot make it right by doing it just because He is sovereign. If God does it just because He is sovereign then He would not be God but something else.

What makes God, God is so intricately bound to his intent for doing things that if He were to do a thing just by virtue of the fact that He is sovereign and can do it rather than by virtue of the fact that it is loving? He would not be God as we know Him but something else. If sovereignty is what defines what makes up love in such a way that God doing anything is what defines love, then love has no meaning and can be anything and everything it is and opposes any time, which is ridiculous.

God can do anything and everything is what sovereignty means by definition. God will only do what is loving and what is righteousness. Righteousness is the foundation of his throne. In other words, righteousness is the constraint of his sovereign rule. Love is how God rules His creation. Sovereignty, Righteousness, Justice, Mercy and all the other attributes of God fall under the umbrella of His love. God being love is foundational to Gods nature, character, the gospel and the entire purpose for Christs 1st Coming. John 3:16. God rules by His love. The question we need to be asking ourselves is this, how does our Sovereign God display His love in conjunction with His rule over mankind

hope this helps !!!

 

[Diserner]

I don’t object to Calvinism because of injustice. Nor do I put God’s attribute of love above his other ones. I understand other people do that, but you will never see it in my arguments, and I disagree with them. I have argued just as strongly with non-Calvinists.

I do believe God has the moral right to run his universe however he pleases. And to reject that idea is to be in rebellion to God. Thus I am the more thankful God is maximally loving… without acting like he owes it to us, or is evil if he were not.

So I agree you have pinpointed in invalid criticism against Calvinism. God is in a place of importance, value and power, such that there is no external standard of morality he is somehow obligated to fulfill. I agree it's an important distinction, and a lot rides on it.

However, this objection does not validate Calvinism, or leave it as the only logical alternative left.

 

[civic]

I don’t object to Calvinism because of injustice. Nor do I put God’s attribute of love above his other ones. I understand other people do that, but you will never see it in my arguments, and I disagree with them. I have argued just as strongly with non-Calvinists.

I do believe God has the moral right to run his universe however he pleases. And to reject that idea is to be in rebellion to God. Thus I am the more thankful God is maximally loving… without acting like he owes it to us, or is evil if he were not.

So I agree you have pinpointed in invalid criticism against Calvinism. God is in a place of importance, value and power, such that there is no external standard of morality he is somehow obligated to fulfill. I agree it's an important distinction, and a lot rides on it.

However, this objection does not validate Calvinism, or leave it as the only logical alternative left.

Yes God cannot act immoral , unjust , unloving etc .

Double Predestination , determinism , tulip is unloving , not loving.

Just think as a parent having the ability to save all your 8 children yet only save 2 from the fire and jet the rest burn because you determined never to save them because you did not love them , only tge two you saved and hated the other 6 children . You gave them what they deserved. The 2 you saved were lucky you decided to save them in the first place anyways .

That’s the God in Calvinism .

 

[Diserner]

Yes God cannot act immoral , unjust , unloving etc .

Double Predestination , determinism , tulip is unloving , not loving.

Just think as a parent having the ability to save all your 8 children yet only save 2 from the fire and jet the rest burn because you determined never to save them because you did not love them , only tge two you saved and hated the other 6 children . You gave them what they deserved. The 2 you saved were lucky you decided to save them in the first place anyways .

That’s the God in Calvinism .

God is authorized and validated in doing things humans cannot.

Thus I don't find your illustration to be a true correlation.

I've Calvinists use the "human parents would never" argument with me to prove God wouldn't allow someone to be lost at all.

It just doesn't work, it's an invalid criticism.


However, it is a logically valid argument to say it is less than maximally loving.

 

[civic]

God is authorized and validated in doing things humans cannot.

Thus I don't find your illustration to be a true correlation.

I've Calvinists use the "human parents would never" argument with me to prove God wouldn't allow someone to be lost at all.

It just doesn't work, it's an invalid criticism.


However, it is a logically valid argument to say it is less than maximally loving.

Then you define love much differently than God word , the lexicons and dictionary’s.

 

[civic]

Is God Benevolent, loving , good ?

What is the simple meaning of benevolence?


goodwill; charitableness

desire to do good to others; goodwill; charitableness: to be filled with benevolence toward one's fellow creatures.

 

[civic]

Is God benevolent or omnibenevolent?


God is all-loving

Omnibenevolent means all-loving. According to Christian teaching, God proved his all-loving nature by sacrificing his only son, Jesus, to make up for humankind's sins. This sacrifice allowed humans the opportunity to have eternal life with God in Heaven .

 

[civic]

Christianitycom

When we say God is Omnibenevolent, we mean He is all good. I often hear the phrase, “God is good,” applied almost like a high five or an approval of God’s actions in granting us something we want. But what does “God is good” really mean?

What Does Omnibenevolent Mean?​

Omni derives from the Latin meaning “all.” Bene means “good,” and volensmeans “willing.” (Oxford English Dictionary). Thus, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, omnibenevolent means “unlimited or infinite benevolence.” Meanwhile, benevolence means “the quality of being kind, helpful and generous.” When referring to the triune God, the term means “possessing perfect or unlimited goodness.”

To define God as omnibenevolent is to declare His nature, essence, and being literally as all good-willing. An omnibenevolent God is untainted in action, motive, thought, or feeling.

In Kevin DeYoung’s sermon “The Never-Failing, Never-Changing, All-Surpassing Goodness of God,” he describes God’s goodness “as the blessing and bounty of God.” More fully, DeYoung continues with “Divine goodness is the overflowing bounty of God by which he who receives nothing and lacks nothing communicates blessing to his creation and to his creatures.”

 

[Arial]

I noticed you left Jesus teaching on love from the gospels out . Any reason you left out God in the flesh teachings on the topic of loving the world ( all sinners ) loving your enemies , praying for them , turning the other cheek , giving them the coat off your back , not returning evil for evil but blessing them with your words ?

hope this helps !!!

No even though I did not quote any of Jesus' sayings that does not mean I left Him out. This is what I mean by arriving at conclusions by separating certain sayings and scriptures from the rest of what the Bible teaches or from the rest of the Bible.

You acknowledge that Jesus is God and yet you present Him here as a different God from the self revealed one in the OT----where He first began revealing Himself. As though Jesus came to show us the real God or a changed God even though Jesus says He is the fulfillment of the law and prophets. (The OT.)

What Jesus is saying and demonstrating is that if we truly reflect the image of God and are obedient to His moral character, then we will follow what He says is our obligation as having been created by God. We are to be merciful because we have been shown mercy. We are to love because He first loved us (and His covenant love is personal whereas His general mercy and love is not.) His general love and mercy is shown by not destroying everyone and in "It rains on the just and the unjust alike." His personal love was seen for Israel within the covenant promises, and is seen in the new covenant through union with Christ. But none of this removes or reduces any of His other attributes or actions.

 

[civic]

No even though I did not quote any of Jesus' sayings that does not mean I left Him out. This is what I mean by arriving at conclusions by separating certain sayings and scriptures from the rest of what the Bible teaches or from the rest of the Bible.

You acknowledge that Jesus is God and yet you present Him here as a different God from the self revealed one in the OT----where He first began revealing Himself. As though Jesus came to show us the real God or a changed God even though Jesus says He is the fulfillment of the law and prophets. (The OT.)

What Jesus is saying and demonstrating is that if we truly reflect the image of God and are obedient to His moral character, then we will follow what He says is our obligation as having been created by God. We are to be merciful because we have been shown mercy. We are to love because He first loved us (and His covenant love is personal whereas His general mercy and love is not.) His general love and mercy is shown by not destroying everyone and in "It rains on the just and the unjust alike." His personal love was seen for Israel within the covenant promises, and is seen in the new covenant through union with Christ. But none of this removes or reduces any of His other attributes or actions.

God is immutable and Christ is God His words and deeds are the words and deeds of God the Father as He taught which were revealed in the gospels .

 

[Rockson]

I don’t object to Calvinism because of injustice.

I do. God is just and being just requires a moral standard. He most certainly does have that by the way and it runs contrary to Calvinistic teachings.

I do believe God has the moral right to run his universe however he pleases. And to reject that idea is to be in rebellion to God.

We can see something interesting though in Gen 18: 22

And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD. And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

We can notice here God did not rebuke Abraham or get mad at him for asking such a thing or to say who are you to question me.. He didn't mind the question being asked at all, and replied,

And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. Gen 18: 26

I suppose if Abraham heard this statement God has the moral right to run the universe anyway he wants he probably would say something like Well being Almighty I suppose he could do it but such wouldn't make him right and just. And again that's exactly the point Abraham raised and God didn't seem to mind. I'll say it again. God didn't seem to mind. We could bring up and discuss Rom 9 but I think that needs balanced out with KNOWING which I believe Paul knew and his audience that God was good and just...if anything is within that perimeters then he can do whatever he wants. If one doesn't like it too bad...get over it.

 

[Diserner]

I do. God is just and being just requires a moral standard. He most certainly does have that by the way and it runs contrary to Calvinistic teachings.

God himself IS the moral standard.

Otherwise you have created something EXTERNAL to God that God has to obey.

That is idolatry.

I suppose if Abraham heard this statement God has the moral right to run the universe anyway he wants he probably would say something like Well being Almighty I suppose he could do it but such wouldn't make him right and just.

I don't agree with you about Abraham.

In our modern Western society we are very used to everyone possessing their inalienable rights, but this is not the way a monarchy works.

Also you doublespeak here you say "I suppose... God has the moral right... but such wouldn't make him right..."

God has the moral right... period.

End of story.

We need to stop thinking we are justified in taking God's place.

 

[Arial]

God being love has nothing to do with His creation. That is secondary. God is love, and that love is perfect, lacking nothing within His Triune nature as God. Love, by definition, has to be expressed with another, which is why a unitarian god cannot be love. Love requires another to share and express that love, and it is what we see with the Triune God. God is love before anyone/anything existed.

I agree with your position of love needing an object for that love in order to be love. And I agree that this love exists one to the other in the Trinity. But to say it has nothing to do with His creation, that love is secondary to His creation, is self contradictory. How could it not be involved with His purpose for creation and specifically the crowning glory of that creation, a being made in His image and likeness? Explain how anything of God can be secondary to other things of God?

Before creation, there was no sin. There was no judgment, wrath, mercy, grace, and justice.

That isn't true. Is 14:12-13; Ez 13:13-17; Jude 6.

Because those are God's secondary attributes concerning the creation and the fall. God's love is a primary attribute, like Holy is a primary one. Everything about God flows from His being Love which includes His secondary attributes, which were not in use until the creation and the fall.

You have absolutely nothing to support that God brought forth within Himself secondary attributes that only apply to creation and the fall. Where was He keeping them before He created the earth and it before He created the earth and it's inhabitants? Everything about God flows from His being holy which includes every last one of His attributes. They are all Holy and all always present and in action. It is His holiness that made our fall such a catastrophe. It is His holiness that cannot abide unholiness and brings His wrath upon us. Your "theology" has a segmented God.

 

[civic]

God himself IS the moral standard.

Otherwise you have created something EXTERNAL to God that God has to obey.

That is idolatry.



I don't agree with you about Abraham.

In our modern Western society we are very used to everyone possessing their inalienable rights, but this is not the way a monarchy works.

Also you doublespeak here you say "I suppose... God has the moral right... but such wouldn't make him right..."

God has the moral right... period.

End of story.

We need to stop thinking we are justified in taking God's place.

And God is benevolent , good, loving within His own being. That’s His nature and character as Father, Son, Holy Spirit. God is immutable a d does not change. He is the same yesterday today and forever m. The God in the OT is exactly the same on the NT. It’s a fallacy to claim God changed . Jesus love for us is not different than His love with the Father. He expressed Gods love.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

I agree with your position of love needing an object for that love in order to be love. And I agree that this love exists one to the other in the Trinity. But to say it has nothing to do with His creation, that love is secondary to His creation, is self contradictory. How could it not be involved with His purpose for creation and specifically the crowning glory of that creation, a being made in His image and likeness? Explain how anything of God can be secondary to other things of God?


That isn't true. Is 14:12-13; Ez 13:13-17; Jude 6.

You have absolutely nothing to support that God brought forth within Himself secondary attributes that only apply to creation and the fall. Where was He keeping them before He created the earth and it before He created the earth and it's inhabitants? Everything about God flows from His being holy which includes every last one of His attributes. They are all Holy and all always present and in action. It is His holiness that made our fall such a catastrophe. It is His holiness that cannot abide unholiness and brings His wrath upon us. Your "theology" has a segmented God.

You misquoted me. His love is primary not secondary. His love is changeless before and after creation . That’s my thesis and it’s irrefutable. God is immutable and God is love within His own Triune Being. That never changed before or after creation .

 

[Rockson]

Theology of course is the study of God. In debates against Calvinism accusations are hurled against the theology and by extension apply to those who believe it.

First of all there are two ways we can choose to express ourselves. Believing the best of people in how we talk or the worse. I see you've gravitated towards a charged negative way of expressing yourself. You say accusations are hurled! Perhaps you can dial it back if for no other reason then to create peace and give people the benefit of the doubt and accept a great many are merely wanting to challenge your position. Such doesn't mean they're some kind of unkind individual . I think all could agree that the word hurled isn't perhaps a good word which leads to peace. How about we keep thing in a positive groove. I think people's time here would be a lot more enjoyable. PEACE.

 

[Diserner]

The way I would phrase it, is some attributes are not manifested until there is a creation.

Attributes by definition do not have to be manifested; for example, having the ability to fly is not equal to flying.

 

[Diserner]

I'm fine with hurled, I don't think it's a big deal.