Some carry predestination to an absurd length.
Who gets to determine what is or is not "absurd"?
Mormons claim that God being invisible is "absurd".
Mormons also claim that God creating
ex nihilo is "absurd".
JW"s claim that Christ being God is "absurd".
Obviously, none of those things is absurd.
By simply claiming by
ipse dixit that something is "absurd", you are rejecting Scripture in favour of your own man-made ideas and opinons.
I've studied the Bible for over 33 years.
And it was the BIBLE that convinced me of "predestination", and the theology nicknamed "Calvinism". I didn't get it from "Calvin". I didn't get it from "Luther". I got it from the Bible.
And you are trying to get me (and others) to reject Scripture in favour of your man-made ideas. And we are simply not going to do that. You have a man-made bias AGAINST Calvinism, which precludes you from properly understanding and accepting Scripture for what it says.
They believe that God predestines all things which would include all evils and lies.
Of course that is not the God of the Bible.
And of course that IS the God of the Bible.
And you haven't demonstrated otherwise.
As I pointed out in your other thread, you aren't attacking Calvinism with Scripture, you are attacking it with your opinions and rationalizations. And your opinions and rationalizations don't trump Scripture.
I'm not aware of how familiar you are with Scripture, but back in Genesis, Joseph's brothers hated him. They initially wanted to kill him, but they ended up selling him into slavery in Egypt.
That is evil. Yet GOD predestined it:
Gen. 50:20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.
Hopefully you are aware of the crucivixion of Christ. The Romans and the Jews put the Son of God, an innocent man, to a tortuous death.
That is evil. Yet God predestined it:
Acts 4:27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.
So yes, Scripture refutes you.
An example of the absurdities that this logically leads to is the murder of Abel.
Again, you are using your man-made rationalizations to reject Scripture.
You are free to reject Scripture, but we refuse to do so.
If God predestined Cain to kill Abel, then it was really God that did it.
Gen. 4:8 Cain spoke to Abel his brother. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him.
Scripture says that Cain killed Abel.
And so I believe Scripture.
Your error is in assuming (wrongly) that it is an "either/or" situation, was it God or was it Cain? It's both. Just as in Gen. 50:20, Joseph's brothers caused him to be sold into slavery, but God caused it as well, "that many people should be kept alive". Just as in Acts 4:27-28, it was the Jews and Romans who crucified Jesus, but it was God who predestined it, to atone for sin.
You continue to use man-made rationalization as a means of rejecting Scripture.
Cain is not "no more than just a weapon". Cain had a will, and he had his own reasons for murdering his brother. To claim that Cain was "no more than just as weapon" is to deny that man has a will.
Cain was no more than just a weapon in God's hand.
It is interesting that you word it in that way, because that is EXACTLY what the Bible teaches!
Isa. 10:5 Woe to Assyria, the rod of my anger; the staff in their hands is my fury!
6 Against a godless nation I send him, and against the people of my wrath I command him, to take spoil and seize plunder, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.
7 But he does not so intend, and his heart does not so think; but it is in his heart to destroy, and to cut off nations not a few;
In this passage, Isaiah is explaining how God is wielding Assyria against Israel like a club, and attacking Israel as discipline. This is a good thing. But Assyria's motives are far from good. They don't understand that God is using them, as they have their own evil motives for attacking Israel.
Another example is God predestines all things then God predestines all lies. But Jesus Christ is not the father of lies, Satan is.
Another thing you don't seem to understand is that sin is not independently "evil". It depends on the intention of the actor. "You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good". This is describing the same act. The brothers committed sin, but God did not, because He had a good intent. It's like asking if it's a sin to cut someone with a knife. if the man is a mugger, it's a sin. If the man is a surgeon trying to save your life, it's not a sin.\
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. - John 8:44
God is not the devil.
God created the devil, in case you weren't aware.
And God uses the devil for His own purposes. For instance, we find in the beginning of Job that the devil is powerless to do ANYTHING without first getting God's permission.
\Another example is that the Israelites were at one time deceived into sacrificing their children to devils. But God said that it never came into His mind that they should do that. So God could not have predestined that evil.
I believe your anti-Calvinist bias is forcing you to misinterpret those passages.
They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind: - Jeremiah 19:5
And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. - Jeremiah 32:35
There are two ways to interpret these passages:
1) "neither did it enter my mind [for them to burn their sons with fire...]"
2) "neither did it enter my mind [to command them to burn their sons with fire...]"
I believe both interpretations are grammatically possible, and your insistence in ARBITRARILY trying to force the first interpretation is simply an indication of your man-made bias against the teachings of Scripture.
I would assert that there are two vaild reasons to reject your interpretation as the proper understanding.
1) First of all, when a word refers back to an antecedent, it is usually the most proximal, and "command" is closer to the referent than "burn their sons".
2) It occurs to me that if you interpret the verse, "neither came it into my mind [for them to burn their sons]", you are denying GOd's omniscience. And as a Christian, I can't accept an interpretation that denies God's omniscience.
I know that many of the Reformed are into predestination.
"Into"?!
We accept it as God's Biblical truth.
But there are differences of opinion.
What do you believe? Did God predestine all evils and all lies?
I believe Scripture.
And since Scripture teaches predestination, and since you haven't presented any Scriptural arguments against predestination, only man-made rationalizations.
But I really have no need to convince you of predestination, since I don't believe the understanding is essential for salvation. But your man-made attacks on predestination seem to conflict with your assertion of salvation by "faith alone". If our salvation is based on "faith alone", then what does it matter what we believe about predestination? It seems that you are ADDING to "faith" as to what is "required" for salvation.
