ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Response to clete's last line in post 1877: "Oh, it has moral meaning alright. It is just that the moral meaning resides NOT IN MAN, but in God."
When you think about it, that, in a nutshell, defines the difference between the Reformed faith and other doctrinal views. The Reformed faith strives to preserve g;ory to God alone, while other doctrinal views take offense at the idea. They wish to share that glory which belongs to God alone, but He has said, "my glory I will not share with another." SOLI DEO GLORIA!!

This is a lie. I do not, nor have I ever met anyone who wishes to share in God's glory.

Like I said elswhere in the same post from which you quoted, Calvinists sacrifice the God of love and relationship on the alter of a convoluted understanding of both "glory" and "soverignty". They turn the living God of the Bible into a static, unchangable stone idol.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 
Last edited:

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Clete

This is a lie. I do not, nor have I ever met anyone who wishes to share in God's glory.

Like I said elswhere in the same post from which you quoted, Calvinists sacrifice the God of love and relationship on the alter of a convoluted understanding of both "glory" and "soverignty". They turn the living God of the Bible into a static, unchangable stone idol.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Exactly. The omnicompetent God is so sovereign and glorious that He is not threatened by giving genuine freedom to His creatures. A control-freak God is not praiseworthy.
 

Rolf Ernst

New member
Clete, godrulz--anytime someone credits themselves with that which is the work of god alone, they are claiming for themselves that glory which rightly belongs to Him alone. That means that EVERYONE who believes that they are ultimately the ones who cast the deciding vote on whether they will spend eternity with or apart from God is claiming to be the final determiner of their fate and, if they "decide" for christ, they are then claiming credit for that which He alone does. That is NOT Soli Deo Gloria.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Clete, godrulz--anytime someone credits themselves with that which is the work of god alone, they are claiming for themselves that glory which rightly belongs to Him alone. That means that EVERYONE who believes that they are ultimately the ones who cast the deciding vote on whether they will spend eternity with or apart from God is claiming to be the final determiner of their fate and, if they "decide" for christ, they are then claiming credit for that which He alone does. That is NOT Soli Deo Gloria.

This would only be true if the authority to make that decision had not been delegated to us by God. Had we taken that authority by force, which of course is impossible, then you would have a point. As it is, you are simply making a baseless claim.
 

Delmar

Patron Saint of SMACK
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Clete

This is a lie. I do not, nor have I ever met anyone who wishes to share in God's glory.

Resting in Him,
Clete
I think I have seen a few on TV who wish to, but I get your point.
 

Rolf Ernst

New member
Not so, Clete. If the issue had at any point been left in the hands of unregenerate men, there would have been absolutely NO ONE to inherit the kindom of heaven. Your speaking of man's "authority to make that decision" shows that you take seriously your supposed role. Did God really delegate authority to men--to dead men--to determine the extent of the glory that would belong to Christ because of His atonement? Think about that. God's first purpose is His own glory and the covenant of redemption struck between the Father and the Son was a primary means to the display of that glory.

Of all the things possible for God's consideration before the creation of the world, what was it which God covenanted with the Son about before the foundation of the world? It was the covenant of redemption settled in every detail and sure. No other issue is described as having been the issue of a covenant between them before the foundation of the world.

Remember that a covenant between parties is an agreement wherein two or more agree together to accomplish a certain desired end. The means to its accomplishment--the role, the duty of each covenanter, and the reward he is to receive in return for his part in the covenant is formally stipulated.

What two parties in heaven and earth can best be relied upon to (1.) accomplish the task required and (2.) to give to the Servant the promised reward? This is the circumstance under which the Son of God came to earth, and it is reflected in many ways; primarily in Christ's concern for His sheep. Of gentiles who had not yet even heard the gospel, Jesus said, "other sheep I have which are not of this fold. Them also I must bring and there wqill be one shepherd and one fold." Note that He "Must" bring them. Note that even before the gospel was sent to them, He already spoke of them as His "sheep" whom, said He, "I MUST bring." HE "MUST" BRING THEM BECAUSE THAT WAS HIS AGREED UPON DUTY TO DO SO IN THE COVENANT OF REDEMPTION. WOULD THE SON FAIL IN HIS AGREED UPON ROLE? PERISH SUCH A THOUGHT!

They were His sheep before they even heard the gospel BECAUSE they were given to Him in the covenant of redemption (an agreement struck between the Father and the Son) before the foundation of the world. How can anyone even begin to imagine that sinners, dead in tresspasses and sin, could be the final determiners of WHO THE FATHER AWARDED TO THE SON IN THE COVENANT OF GRACE?
 
Last edited:

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Not so, Clete.

Saying it doesn't make it so, Rolf.

The bottom line is this. If what you say is true, love is meaningless (period).
And that truly is the bottom line difference between your position and mine.
Your base presupposition is God's glory, mine is love. I say that God is glorious because He loves us and because He has made us capable of loving Him back and He has done so for loves sake, not for the sake of His glory (which of course makes Him all that much more glorious). You, on the other hand, have openly stated that God is selfish (seeks first His own glory) and that He is right to be so. And that is a perfectly logical position to take given the rest of what Calvinism teaches. According to Calvinism, all of existence is arbitrary by definition and so why should God be any different?

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Mr. Coffee

New member
Originally posted by Clete You, on the other hand, have openly stated that God is selfish (seeks first His own glory) and that He is right to be so.
Resting in Him,
Clete
[butting in]

Surely, nothing could be as lovely to God as Himself.

God's intra-Trinitarian love isn't vain preening in front of a mirror.

And our own fulfillment and gratitude isn't complete until we give him thanks and praise. In this way God's love for his glory is immesurably generous.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by ilyatur

[butting in]

Surely, nothing could be as lovely to God as Himself.

God's intra-Trinitarian love isn't vain preening in front of a mirror.

And our own fulfillment and gratitude isn't complete until we give him thanks and praise. In this way God's love for his glory is immeasurably generous.

Thanks for butting in and welcome to the discussion!

I think you may have missed my point or at least the bulk of it anyway.

The whole point is that to seek one's own glory is the precise opposite of how glory is acquired. God is glorious BECAUSE He is humble; BECAUSE He is loving; BECAUSE He acts in the best interests of others before His own, the ultimate example of which is the incarnation and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The reason why His incarnation and subsequent crucifixion was so glorious was precisely because it was such an incredible humiliation; and a voluntary one at that!
Now, is it accurate to say that every action God makes results in His glorification? Yes, of course! But that is only so because His actions are righteous, not because He has His own glory as His motivation. Love is His motivation and therefore His actions are both righteous and glorious. If His own glorification was the goal, then His action would be neither loving nor righteous and therefore decidedly not glorious. You simply cannot chase after glory and get it, even if you're God.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Rolf Ernst

New member
Clete--God is not vain like we humans. If you will notice, His making His name known is interchangable with His glory; and that is because in ALL that He is, He is glorious; glorious in ALL His attributes.

You cannot rightly consider His first purpose being His own glory until you first link the WAY He gets that glory which is RIGHTLY due Him without realizing the direct link between His glory and Him making His name known.

And there is another connection you MUST ACKNOWLEDGE if you aim to honor God in the consideration of His first purpose being His own glory: that connection is another direct link between His glory (again by making His name known) AND His people concerning whom the Father and Son COVENANTED TOGETHER to redeem before the foundation of the world. And that direct link is seen the words of the Psalmist, "They who know your name will put their trust in you." The Apostle asked, "how can they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" and Jesus said, "take my yoke upon you and LEARN OF ME, and you shall find rest for your soul." NOW--that course Jesus recommended would redound greatly to His glory, because every bit about Him is glorious; but can you charge Him with having "selfish" intent in bidding men to LEARN OF HIM? (caps mine)

That is the key to proper evangelism which seems to have been lost in this age of easy-believism when men talk to men about themselves more than they talk to men about God.

Therefore your accusation against God for having His own glory as His highest end is based on lack of knowledge of the FACT that making His glory (His name) known is THE KEY TO THE DELIVERING OF LOST SOULS FROM PERDITION. Now--you call that selfish if you like, but I would not dare tread where you have been treading by accusing Him of being "selfish" for having His own glory as His highest end. It is as if you dare to think that God thinks as men do; BUT the fact that God's first end is His own glory DOES NOT MEAN He strives for glory selfishly (as if He were a man) as you have charged. Why, Clete, do you think the apostle's admonition was, "In all that you do, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do ALL (caps mine) to the glory of God. Clete!!! Align yourself with the Word of God!!

Oh. One other point: why do you think that the first thing which was on the mind of Jesus as He began praying to the Father in Gethsemane just prior to offering Himself up was, "Father, I have glorified thee upon the earth. Now glorify thou me with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." That was first in His order of prayer because throughout His earthly ministry it had been His highest motivation. Do not fail to see the link between that and the joyous proclamation on the day of His advent--"GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST, AND ON EARTH, PEACE AND GOODWILL TO MEN." Again, this proclamation was the sum of the meaning of His birth and ministry. AGAIN-- do not fail to notice the LINK between "Glory to God" and "peace and goodwill to men."

Clete--after the scriptures I have just called to your attention, if you post in response that the request Jesus made to the Father was "selfish," every time I see your name on the forum, it will effect the way I view that name. Only god's name ALWAYS redounds to His name and gives to Him that glory which is His due!! The names of men do not do so for them. You remember that and NEVER dare try praying in your own name, on the basis of who YOU are or on the basis of what YOU have done. Seek refuge in the GLORIOUS NAME OF JESUS. Unless you come before the Father in that gloroius name, YOUR PRAYER WILL NOT BE HEARD. All that having been said, Clete, you have as good Lord's day tomorrow!!
 
Last edited:

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Rolf,

Your post is unresponsive. You did little more than simply restate your position.
My response is the same.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

I was undoubted typing my response ilyatur while you were typing this "response" to me. Much of what I said to him applies to you as well. Perhaps you hadn't seen it prior to having posted. If so, feel free to respond to what I said to him.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Rolf Ernst

New member
Clete--I didn't say anything myself. I only cited scriptures which clearly showed God's glory to be His chief end. If you disagree, cite scriptural guides as your reason. Again--it is not just what "I" say. It is what the scripture teaches that counts, and I have shown that scriptures teach it. So rather than just say, "saying so doesn't make it so," address your reason for saying it isn't so even though the bible says it is so.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
God does seek His highest glory since this is the highest good for Himself and us. He is worthy! It is not selfish to demand worship since He is the most worthy, valuable being in the universe. Loving God supremely is the wisest thing His creation can do. We are created to love and enjoy God forever and for His glory and purposes. This is biblical, not just Cathecisms.

We do not need to pit glory, sovereignty, love, holiness, justice, mercy, etc. against each other. We just need to understand them correctly.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Clete--I didn't say anything myself. I only cited scriptures which clearly showed God's glory to be His chief end. If you disagree, cite scriptural guides as your reason. Again--it is not just what "I" say. It is what the scripture teaches that counts, and I have shown that scriptures teach it. So rather than just say, "saying so doesn't make it so," address your reason for saying it isn't so even though the bible says it is so.
You've done no such thing, Rolf. I am not stupid. Your post is unresponsive and you will not bait me into responding to it. Proof texting is easy. I know third graders who can do it. Your position is illogical, that alone proves that it cannot be Biblical. If you care to attempt to establish your position using BOTH Scripture and sound reason, I will respond but not before.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by godrulz
We do not need to pit glory, sovereignty, love, holiness, justice, mercy, etc. against each other. We just need to understand them correctly.
I agree with this! Indeed, this is nearly verbatim what I had in mind when I wrote...
  • "I say that God is glorious because He loves us and because He has made us capable of loving Him back and He has done so for loves sake, not for the sake of His glory (which of course makes Him all that much more glorious)."

The point is that God's love is what make Him glorious not His glory that makes Him love.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Rolf Ernst

New member
I have cited numerous scriptures, all declaring the same thing, and It is as true now as it was when it was first said: "A man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven."
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by Yorzhik

Then, simply, God is unjust.

Exactly! The logical conclusion of Rolf's theology is an unjust, unloving God and yet Rolf and those who agree with him would insist that God is both just and loving so their theology is fundamentally self contradictory and therefore false and therefore unbiblical. Rolf can proof text all day long and twice on Sundays and it won't change anything. What is true cannot be self contradictory.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Rolf Ernst

New member
VERY INTERESTING--They are subjecting the word of God to the rationalizations of man's feeble mind; and it never occurs to them that the problem may not be with God or His word, but with their ignorance. Cite ever so many scriptures, and still they require that they must meet the demands of fallen man's reasonings.

"For since by wisdom the world by wisdom knew not God..."
 
Top