Calvinism and the origin of evil

Luke, you are more than welcome to be done with me. You most certainly, as anyone, hold to the theological position of your choosing (or determination) no problem there, I address you when you swipe over someone with assertions or implications that they or their point of view is worthless, vile, stupid et. al.

 

Do you?
You attribute evil to God.
Does that not make God evil?

 

I think Luke has on many occasions asserted that God could not possibly be glorified without it, thus as far as I can tell Luke does need to ascribe "evil" to God, but he doesnt want to take that final step. Instead, dance around it with arguments like "proximate" and "remote", thus not decreeing it without "dirtying" his own hands.

 

I did not believe this three days ago. But posts in this thread have convinced me. I hold ho ill will toward you, Luke, or any other person. But I must be honest when I post what I have come to believe ... primarily through the posts here. By the way, heresy simply means the wrong answer to a right question and I certainly am not advocating anyone be burned at the stake.

If God approved, preordained, predestined ... or whatever you want to call it, all evil before the beginning then I cannot see how it can be said that God is a loving God and wants only the best for us. It is not logical. It is a contradiction and God is not a God of contradiction. This I am left with the belief in free will.

Now, if we do have free will to do good or evil, then evil must be a possibility.
Could God prevent evil. Yes. Why doesn't he? Because he gave us free will and he loves us enough that he will not take back what he has already given us.


ps: you can call me a heretic and I will not be upset. It will only mean you do not agree with me.

 

Thank you for your soft kind and gentle words. Should be a model and inspiration to us all.

 

You bring a red herring into this debate, and that is that Christ is the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world. We all agree on that. No one here disputes that.

What we do dispute is that God is the author of evil.
Get down to the nitty gritty.
Did God decree honor killings, the rape of innocent women, abortions, child molestations, etc. Is this what God decreed before the foundation of the world?

 

You are out of line Luke. If you can't debate without personally attacking others and name-calling, then take a break and leave the board.

 

Sadly our society has lost the art of discussion and conversation.

I believe the Calvinist view, as explained in this thread is indefensible. The more it has been tried the more convinced that it is playing games and twisting words.

Weren't there Anabaptists around before Calvin? And simply because a belief system is old does not mean it is correct. That smacks of the Catholic argument of tradition. [very gently said] Oh and don't get me started on Calvin's personal life and actions. Did a bit of reading on them yesterday.

Getting late over here. See y'all tomorrow.

 

It tells me how happy that I am not like you (regardless of our theological positions).

 

I will "sign off" from commenting for now so as to not allow anything to degenerate further.

 

And I've NEVER disagreed with that point Luke, which is why this discussion keeps going in circles. You refuse to deal with our actual points of contention.

It would be faster to pick out a theological dictionary and copy and paste a definition with which you agree. Remember find one for "decree" and "ordain."

Wrong. There is more involved, but the fact that there is ANY element of permission is the subject I'm attempting to get you to acknowledge and deal with, yet you continue to avoid and sidestep that matter.

Of course.

Yes (assuming you mean by "empower" what I believe it to mean)

Yes, (depending on what you mean by "intend.")

Of course.

You said God did it and Satan did it, equating them as both doing the evil deed but the ONLY difference being their motive, Luke. That is obviously what you argued. You can't have it both ways. Either God did the evil but it wasn't evil because of his motives or he didn't do the evil. Pick one and stick with it.

Which we all (including you) acknowledged are "evil." The ONLY difference is that you dismiss them as being pure due to right motive. It is not that difficult Luke, just own up to what you have said.

A person can have a perfect motive but choose unacceptable means and still be held to account. We proved that point with the example of someone with the pure motive of stopping abortions who chooses to kill the doctor.

So now you are equating an accident with the direct agency of a divine choice? Doesn't follow Luke...

I've always explained your position the same you have which is that, "God is DOING these things {what things? "EVIL things"}. But God is not evil in doing them because his motive is pure and right."

I've always represented you holding that position, even though it does always appear to shift and dance a bit depending on where the pressure is put on it.

 

Just like you would ignore your son when he revolts against your "decree" for him to do his homework??

 

And often confessions come with a page of definitions for terms they use to describe things like 'decrees' such as a definition for the word 'ordain." What is wrong with me asking you to clarify your view Luke? Why are making this SOOO difficult. I would say its like "pulling teeth" but teeth have never been this hard to get out!!!!

Just define the terms bro. I admit whatever you said, you gave confessional statements and I sought further clarity, ok?

About solder's killing in war? That is the right motive and right means, so what? My contention was those who have right motive but wrong means, remember?

Killing in battle is not evil by anyone's definition. Killing an innocent man is evil, which you regularly argue that God did, but for right motives making it not evil. My first question was why do you go through the trouble of the domino explanation if motive is all that really matters? Why not just say, God did push the dominos but for a good motive and be consistent?