Reformed Calvinism on Absolute Determinism

 First, I think we must begin where we agree. That is, God is neither the author of sin, nor does he condone it. Having said that, I think the differing kinds of Calvinists would clear up many misconceptions, if they wouldn't all use the same words, but mean different things by those words. Some Calvinists believe (as do I) that God has a "perfect and permissive" will, which allows human freedom. Yes our choices are limited. We cannot "freely choose" to defy gravity. If we jump off a cliff, we will fall. Once we jump, we have no other choice but to fall, we cannot choose otherwise. But did God "decree" that we fall? I would say "yes" however He did not decree that I would jump. That was my choice. So God can "decree" a certain thing, and yes be "accused" of "causing" the RESULT of that jump, without decreeing my choice to jump. Within this context, I can agree with those Calvinists who say God "determines" all things because of the laws He has created around our choices. If we disobey His natural law, like gravity, we fall physically, or His moral law we fall spiritually. Either way, because of God's law, it could be said He "determined" the outcome. This is a far cry however from saying that when God "desires" something, that it comes to pass.

As someone who believes that God determines some things, but not all things, here is an analogy. "As a Non Calvinist reminding everyone that non-Calvinists, such as myself, may not believe God determines everything, but that doesn't mean we believe God determines nothing.  Some Calvinists, like Phil Johnson and James White point to examples of God's deterministic activity in the world as if its the smoking gun proving their deterministic premise.  If you witnessed me having to hold down my son in order to give him a shot for diabetes because he was afraid of needles, would you walk away and conclude that I always use brute strength to over power the will of my son, denying my child any freedom or personhood or independence?  Of course not, yet this is what absolute deterministic Calvinists do with the scriptures.  They take examples of God's interaction within the course of human history and insist this is how God determines everything.  This does nothing except undermine the unique divine nature of such events recorded in scripture.

 

Some Calvinists teach that God actually brings about evil, and this I deny. Read what John Piper says about determinism;

"God brings about all things in accordance with his will. In other words, it isn't just that God manages to turn the evil aspects of our world to good for those who love him; it is rather that he himself brings about these evil aspects for his glory, and his people's good.  This includes, as incredible and unacceptable  as it may currently seem, God's having even brought about the Nazis' brutality at Berkenau and Auschwitz, as well as the terrible killings of Dennis Radar and even the sexual abuse of a young child." (Mark R. Talbot, "All the Good That is Ours In Christ: Seeing God's Gracious Hands in The Hurts Other do to Us," in John Piper and Justin Taylor (eds.), Suffering and the Sovereignty of God (Wheaton; Crossway 2006), 31-77 (quote from p 42)

Really? That belief leads to antinomianism. So God must decree the death of millions in order to "bless" me? If He must go to those lengths for me to be blessed, then He must be a weak God. The undertones of this belief imply that God is not sovereign enough to bless me apart from decreeing evil acts. It seems to imply He needs for evil to come about in order to display His goodness or love for His people. The God I believe in does not "need" to decree evil in order to show He can bring about His will. In fact, he doesn't need anything to bring about His will. That, to me, is the beauty of a truly sovereign God, one who can take whatever choices we make, and still insure our good and ultimate glory. That, is the promise of eternal security of the believer, that though our choices may cause us pain, broken fellowship and disciplinary actions, nothing can pluck us from His hand, not our choices, not others' choices, and not Satan's choices. God does not need to decree the sexual abuse of a child to bring about blessing for me. Can (or does) He use the evil choices of men to do so? Absolutely. But that only proves my point, that while Satan is behind such evil, God is not taken by surprise, and already has "decreed" what he will do through that evil act, but that is not the same as saying He decreed the evil act itself. The "absolute determinist" must admit, that if God does indeed decree evil acts, He must also gain "joy" as well as glory from those acts. This, I believe, is more in line with the Islamic view of determinism. This is why they can cut the throats of Christians, fly planes into buildings and force conversions. This is also why Muslims teach that no atonement is necessary, for Allah has mercy on who he wills mercy, and "saves" those who do his will, even if evil is his will. Why is atonement necessary when God can simply choose or decree those who receive mercy?

Let's take a look at an evil that occurred in Scripture. In Jeremiah the Lord declares "They have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings unto Baal, which I did not command, or decree, nor did it come into my mind."  So if God did not decree it, nor did it enter his mind, how did it come to pass according to determinism? It came to pass because the people brought it to pass, not God. It was in their minds, not God's. Was God taken by surprise? Of course not. However, it can't be stated any more clearly than God said it. He did NOT decree it, nor did He bring it about.

Some say that since God "commands" us to love Him, that it proves the type of love He seeks is not the type that is freely given. However, I would dispute that, because whenever he gives that command, it is always followed by a choice. Deuteronomy says "I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. ¹⁶ For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.^17" But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, ¹⁸ I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess." The "if" clearly gives a choice. " There are things we need to see in this. First, God gives a command, followed by consequences of our choice. If we are obedient, he blesses, if not He doesn't. Second, His command is national in scope, not individual. A nation may be a godly nation, but that does not mean each individual is godly. It could be said that America at one time "loved God". Did every person in America "love God"? Jesus clarifies this for us when He said "If you love me, keep my commandments." Here we see the issue of "love" addressed in an individual sense. Jesus isn't "commanding" us to love Him. He is simply saying that IF we love Him, to show it by being obedient to His commands. A love freely given, should be a love that freely honors. This same paradigm is debated when we read "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated." The absolute determinist sees individuals, wheres as the free willer sees a national issue. I can "hate" China, while at the same time loving the Chinese. I can "hate" Nazis, while at the same time love "a" Nazi enough to preach the Gospel to him.

To say that God "causes" all things is on one level true, because he created us, knowing what our choices would be, He is "the cause" of us. So it could be said that no matter what we choose, God is the cause. I am not sure however, that God is happy about His being credited with our evil choices. But let's look at that from a human standpoint. If that is the thought process we wish to live with, then we must see ourselves in such a light as well. If I adopt one dog over another, then the dogs I passed over were adopted by others who trained them to do things like the German Shepherds did that the Nazi concentration camp guards commanded, then am I guilty because they got the dogs I did not choose? Did I cause the attacks on Jews by not taking all the dogs who ended up biting them? I suppose in some way that may be true, for if I had taken ALL the dogs on the planet, they couldn't have bitten anyone. But my choice to adopt a neglected dog did not ultimately "cause" the horrors the Jews endured. 

A woman I have always admired, is Corrie Ten Boom, who was raised in the Dutch Reformed Church. She rejected much of the teachings of her church, which included the teaching that God had abandoned the Jews. The Dutch Reformed Church taught absolute determinism. I have read through her quotes and and put some of them together in an attempt to put her thoughts into what she would say if some of her quotes were strung together. The thoughts are hers indeed, but the words are mine;

"Though I was taught by the Church, that God decrees all the comes to pass, yet it is not so. I have lived in those supposed "decrees" and I know they were not decreed by God. It was Satan's attempt to blot out God's chosen people. God did not even decree for me to help His people, it was my choice, but His command. I suffered evil consequences for my choice, but He was stronger than the evil. God has smitten the evil one by taking what he meant for evil, and turning it to good. The Jews now have a home in Israel, and I have been raised to tell of His goodness. It took the enemy working overtime to influence the many who brought about this evil. My faith was weak and my sisters was strong. I questioned God and blamed Him, while my sister continued to trust. She said we would be free before the new year, because God had promised it. She died in the camp, while I was freed because of a clerical "error". She was freed in death, I was freed to tell the story. So I believe God caused the "mistake". Making a clerical error is no sin, so God causing it to free me is not evil. As in any war, we wait for the enemy to make an error. God "made" the mistake, but the cleric made the error. But God did not start the war. The greater the evil that people may choose, the greater still of the good God works from it." After the war, Corrie said this: "Forgiveness is an act of the will, and the will can function regardless of the temperature of the heart. There is no panic in Heaven! God has no problems, only plans." I agree with her that God has planned FOR all things, not that He has "planned (decreed) all things". She also said "Even as the angry vengeful thoughts boiled through me, I saw the sin of them. Jesus Christ had died for this man; was I going to ask for more? Lord Jesus, I prayed, forgive me and help me to forgive him….Jesus, I cannot forgive him. Give me your forgiveness….And so I discovered that it is not on our forgiveness any more than on our goodness that the world’s healing hinges, but on his. When he tells us to love our enemies, he gives along with the command, the love itself." It is my opinion, that if God gives the love itself, then God must love the man! How did Corrie KNOW that Jesus died for this man? Under Reformed Calvinism, there is no way she could have known. She obviously was not relying on the doctrines of the Dutch Church to inform her. I will take the word of one saint who has lived her faith in the face of hell, over all the theologians in the world.

There is a good movie about Jews in a concentration camp putting God on trial for the evil that had come to the Jews. It would do you well to watch it. It is based on a true story. They began by charging  God for crimes against humanity. No matter what your view, it will make you think. God was found "guilty" for inflicting evil. Watch it and see if you would agree with the verdict. It can be seen here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD7v9phroGM

Also, see this video of a Reformed Calvinist, who has "deconstructed" (left the faith). Listen closely to his words. It is the attitude like John Piper's listed above, that caused this young man to leave the faith. He STILL speaks as though he still believes the Calvinist construct, and this has caused him to hate God. See the video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORYcoIpIQSw. The beginning of the determinist beliefs start at about the 58 minute mark. Pay close attention to Derek's remarks at 58:30. Derek has renounced the Christian faith, and says if the Reformed version is true, that he accepts the fact that God has created him for destruction.

In my view, the only way evil can even exist, is for God to absent Himself from something. The absence of good is evil. Darkness only exists because of the absence of light. Light does not need darkness in order to exist, but darkness needs light in order for there to be darkness. Evil cannot exist without good, but good can exist without evil. I believe God decreed that we have "free will". We can choose light or darkness, good or evil. If we reject morality, which is light, God does not need to "do" anything, or decree anything for evil to take place. He just simply withdraws His Spirit from man whenever we choose evil. When Adam ate the fruit from the tree it was a rejection of God, so He withdrew, and Adam knew he was naked. Of course some absolute determinist might say "Ah ha! You have just proved my point! It is God's choice (decree) to withdraw which "causes" evil, so He must determine all things!" To which I would say, "Nay, it was man's choice that "caused" God to withdraw."To say that God absents Himself before an action occurs, or in order for it to occur, is in my view, that God indeed is the author of evil, for if that's true, He initiated it.

Grief, to me is proof of free will. Grief may come in the form of depression, distress or regret and guilt. None of these things are possible without free will. A dog does not "grieve" the fact that he bit someone. A dog does not "sin". However, a dog can grieve the loss of a loved one or companion. A dog has the capacity to love but not to reason. The human however can both love and reason. The greater the capacity a creature has to love and to reason, the greater his free will. Why? Because the more a creature is like God, or in His image, the greater his capacity to choose. God of course has ultimate free will, whereas ours is limited,  but the choices we do have are indeed free choices to make. God is infinite love and understanding, therefore His free will is limitless. 

When I stand before Him at the final day, I will receive no crown for a decree, only crowns for my choices, after which I will gladly and freely lay them down at the Master's feet. What other choice will I have when in the presence of such Divine Greatness and Perfect Love? (smile) The compulsion involved with real love does not just apply to humanity. Can it not also apply to God who is Love? Did not His own love compel Him to "decree" in eternity past to have a people with whom to share that love? Did not Christ, when in the garden sweating drops of blood, find that there was "no other way"? Is this not a perfect example of there "being no other choice", but at the same time a "choice freely made"?

By Ken Mann