Posts Tagged ‘Reformed Theology’

CALVINIST DISHONESTY ON VIDEO & “DECISIONISM” THE REFORMED STRAW MAN AGAINST FUNDAMENTAL BAPTIST SOUL WINNERS

443700176_PantsOnFire1_answer_1_xlarge - CopyOne of the greatest condemnations against Calvinism aside from all of the great books, sermons, and lectures refuting it, is the Calvinists themselves “in action”. It is my contention that no person can truly be saved under the following examples of Calvinistic “evangelism”, and if this is what Calvinists cling to in order to prove that Calvinism does not destroy meaningful evangelism, then I feel sorry for any of their “converts”. We are going to watch some Calvinism in action by 2 notable Calvinists: Rhology and JD Hall, and show you how what they do in these videos is completely different from what they preach. As Dr. Jerry Walls says, that Calvinists maintain credibility by using misleading and dishonest rhetoric that their theology does not support, we are going to watch this sad-but-true FACT in action.

But first…

Calvinists often accuse fundamental Baptists of offering hearers a less than Biblical gospel presentation by claiming that we merely tell a person to “ask Jesus into your heart” and “just pray a prayer” to be saved and THAT’S IT. We then confirm them, baptize them (perhaps) and then shout “glory” for their salvation. It’s as if they think Baptists never explain the problem of sin, repentance, salvation not being by works, the death-burial-resurrection of Christ and the need for faith in Christ alone, and simply tell a potential convert, “here, pray this magical mantra, repeat after me, and call me in the morning” and wallah, that’s IFB soul winning in a nut shell. This is quite possibly the worst straw man fallacy ever brought against the fundamental Baptists.

Calvinist Paul Washer calls it “Decisionism” because in Reformed theology a person “totally depraved” does not have the ability to make a decision for Christ, thus it is not a valid confession for a person to profess that they have called upon the name of the Lord to be saved since that is a theological impossibility within Reformed soteriology.

Reformer Tony Miano utters a similar sentiment, “No person was ever saved by praying a prayer-ever” (Although Scripture says otherwise*).  Again, these accusations are primarily directed at independent fundamental Baptists whom the Calvinists are in competition with because it is the IFBs that have built their churches “from scratch” while the Calvinists merely steal their church members with VERY FEW exceptions among Calvinists (like Tony Miano) who actually “take it to the street” and preach. Although I do admire the “open air” preaching of men like Miano, a false gospel -x- the valiant effort of a public sermon still equals a false gospel, and it’s not rightly called “evangelism” if the message does not lead to the salvation of a person’s soul, and the Scriptures are emphatic about the fact that if you do not CHOOSE Christ and MAKE A DECISION for Him, you are NOT SAVED. John 8:24, Isaiah 65:12, 1 Kings 18:21, Matthew 23:39.

We are at this point going to assume that our readers are either educated Calvinists or knowledgeable Non Calvinists or Arminians so that we don’t need to include all of the arguments about whether repentance comes before faith and salvation, whether God grants it apart from the freedom of the individual or a lengthy debate on the flaws of compatibilism and how it always leads to hard determinism proving there is no difference between Hyper Calvinism and all other forms. Why make this point now? Because these are going to be the first objections Calvinists reading this are going to send  me: “Why didn’t you cover this or that?” (you know, the ones that tell the officer, “Why didn’t you get the guy ahead of me?) so I’m getting it out-of-the-way now that this is intended to be a short article that points out some of the hypocritical and dishonest measures used by Calvinists when they actually attempt to put their beliefs into action. Now let’s watch!

VIDEO ONE-RHOLOGY

Our first video comes from “Rhology”, a notable Reformed blogger that gets a few frequent mentions from James White, JD Hall and other popular Calvinist authors, posted this video debating some protesters at Hobby Lobby. We brought the video time stamp to about the 24:34 minute mark so the watcher doesn’t get bored with a professing Christian trying to force an unsaved person to make sense of their moral depravity. I’m sure his objection will be that it was for documentary purposes so any harm done to a few in failing to raise the gospel question first is just collateral damage to ensure a proper documentary.

Notice that the male subject, after being insulted by Rhology at the 14:00 minute mark, states something about God giving us “free will”. Now any Calvinist who is thoroughly steeped in their theology ON PAPER and AMONG THEIR FELLOWS would NEVER say what comes next out of Rhology’s mouth:

“Well, God gives us free volition [????], there’s a little bit of a debate on that BUT THAT’S NOT IMPORTANT”.

First of all, what is FREE volition? Isn’t volition itself a voluntary act of the will? and if it’s a voluntary act of the will isn’t it by definition free? So either Rhology is completely ignorant of the very terminology that he demands others get right, or he got nervous and fell into redundancy by accident. We’ll let the professional grammar Nazi himself explain that.

Secondly, since when is the debate about free will not important to a Calvinist? There’s not one single forum or debate group ANYWHERE where the subject of free will is NOT THEE NUMBER ONE debate issue among Calvinists and their opponents aside from the question of God’s responsibility and authorship of sin and evil. HE JUST LIED TO THAT PERSON. Not only did Rhology claim that it wasn’t important, but he began AGREEING WITH HIM that we all had “choices” which Rhology knows good and well is NOT what he truly believes. Rhology theologically speaking would only believe that any choice that man has is based upon whatever nature God has determined him to have, but he knows good and well that the man he is talking to doesn’t speak that language (Farse-ic), so he capitulates to rhetoric that he himself does not truly believe. And if you quote Paul “I became all things to all men” I will web-slap you.

This is just one classic example among many of a Calvinist being dishonest by not being forthright about what they really believe in with others.

VIDEO TWO-JD HALL 

Our second video comes from JD Hall where Hall has made a “come to Montana” video in just under 7 minutes, and shows us fundamental Baptists the “right way” to give a gospel presentation. What is really sad and frustrating is so much of what JD Hall says about the poor standards and lack of morality and discernment among other professing churches is dead on. There’s times I’ve listened to Hall and was cheering him on “Get em JD, get em”, and then shaking my head at the rest. There’s nothing like digging into a good piece of meat only to find it hasn’t been cooked all the way through.

Now JD Hall recently stated,

JD Hall ‏@PulpitAndPen 3h

@MosesModel If we count as public profession answering “What did you do” with “I invited Jesus in my heart” to congregational applause. 😉

So what does Hall consider a valid public profession then? Well, fortunately we have it on video and from his own mouth. The first man on the left simply says, “I got my salvation today” and NOT ONCE does Hall make any reasonable effort to confirm this or probe further. Hall simply asks, “So you THINK you got your salvation today, so now what do you need to DO?” REALLY? How is this any less effective than JD accusing Baptists of “just praying a prayer”? This man never once called upon the name of the Lord to be saved which **IS** in the Bible (Romans 10:9-13), and never confessed that he believes Jesus died, was buried and rose again from the grave and that He is God in the flesh: things that are BASIC fundamentals in the gospel presentation (1 Cor 15:1-3).

The second person Hall makes a very brief reference to (the gentlemen in the Nike sweater) and simply says the man is a sinner saved by Jesus and not once did this man ever agree with anything other than that he violated some of the ten commandments. Simply confessing that you have sinned isn’t saving faith. Now some might point to Luke 18 where that’s all the publican said, but there’s one huge difference: the publican said “God be merciful to me a sinner”.  Not only did the publican CALL, but there was an obvious Subject to his call:  God.

Thus, Hall confirmed these man’s salvation in less than 7 minutes, who made no real profession of faith, AND HE HAS THE NERVE TO CRITICIZE FUNDAMENTAL BAPTIST SOUL WINNERS? Even a person who is limited in their soul winning practice to the “Romans Road” gives a sinner 3x more information than what was given to these people by Hall. Perhaps Hall should contact a local independent fundamental Baptist church and tag along some night to see how a TEENAGER gives a more thorough presentation of the gospel than he did.

CONCLUSION

This is Calvinist dishonesty in action. Many a Calvinist (like J.I. Packer) will tell their listeners “OF COURSE I tell them God loves them” knowing that they don’t really believe that; knowing that what they really mean is that God providentially loves them, but does not love them in any sense that the person’s they are speaking to understand the term “love”. And so too, here, Rhology simply agrees with the man’s definition of free will knowing that not only is that an important distinction between Calvinism and all other forms of theology-of which he lied to this man about its importance-but is a demonstration of Calvinism utilizing the “accommodation theory” -the theory popularized by the anti-King James ‘scholars’ Semler and Greisbach that it is OK to lie to your congregation if you don’t think they will understand you due to their perceived lack of ability to comprehend any technicalities of your theology or philosophy. (Both of these men rejected the deity of Christ but their textual criticism theories are still followed by men like James White, Daniel Wallace, et al, but that’s another article!). This is a practice that is CLEARLY utilized by Calvinists today.

It is NEVER OK to lie to a person in presenting the gospel to them. Romans 9:1,James 3:14, 1 Tim 2:7, Col 3:9, 2 Cor 11:31. The ironic thing about this “accommodation” practice among Calvinists is that Calvinists are the first to rail against using “means” in salvation presentations. The famous quote by John Ryland to William Carey resounds here, “Young man sit down, If God be pleased to convert the heathen He will do so without your help or mine”. Carey was bucking against the Calvinist belief that means could not be used in attracting converts, which shows William Carey was not really a Calvinist though he adopted SOME of the Calvinist beliefs. But isn’t the use of restraint from explaining the full context of what you believe to a potential convert a “means”? If it is “not important” for you to tell the sinner what you really believe, are you not using a “means” to accommodate him and his “level” of understanding? If the Calvinists were consistent on this point, they would not judge the man’s level of understanding  giving their view that so long he God has not yet “granted him repentance” he remains incapable of comprehending the gospel anyway, so  that again begs the question(?): what difference does it make how honest you are with the person? If God has “chosen” this person to salvation, then God’s truth will not abound more or less through your lie. Romans 3:7.

But these are  perfect examples of why Calvinism is an unfaithful, and untrustworthy, and dishonest theology, and today we have seen it on video. Calvinists regularly interact with others using rhetoric and language that their theology does not support and of which they themselves do not believe, but they do so to maintain their credibility as apparent professing believers.

___________________________________________________

*The following are verses that show clearly people who PRAYED or were TOLD TO PRAY to obtain salvation.

Pray from Websters 1828 Dictionary:

42212 pray PRAY, v. i. [L. precor; proco; this word belongs to the same family as preach and reproach; Heb. to bless, to reproach; rendered in Job 2. 9, to curse;
42213 prayer PRA’YER, n. In a general sense, the act of asking for a favor, and particularly with earnestness. 1. In worship, a solemn address to the Supreme Being,

The very first message that Jesus told the UNSAVED MASSES on proper communication with the Father was called PRAYER. Matthew 6:9-13.

Luke 18:13-“And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.”

Acts 8:21-22-“Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.”

Acts 10:2-4– “A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway. He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius. And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.

Now Cornelius prayer did not result in immediate salvation, for it still required that the truth of the gospel be told to him , and Acts 11:13-14 is clear that he was not saved until AFTER he had met with Peter. So this not only shows that a sinner had the ability to call on God before he was saved, but that God heard his PRAYER contrary to all Calvinist contentions otherwise.

Now for our Greek Onlyism readers, you will search in vain trying to parse a fundamental semantic difference between epikaleo and proseuchomai in any attempt to make ‘prayer’ appear different than ‘to call’. The Calvinists petty arguments on these points actually serve to PREVENT a person from coming to Christ because they eliminate the necessity of CALLING ON GOD for salvation.

 

Risen    I want to examine the often cited proof text that Calvinism and Reformed Theology use as evidence that the spiritually dead can not resist the call of God in the story of Lazarus on John chapter 11. I want to begin by examining the argument of popular apologist and Calvinist author, James White.

James White, in a short video here, makes an extravagant emotional appeal that if Lazarus is not raised from the dead, and Jesus fails, then “scratch Christianity”. He further states, “Jesus did not whisper, but yelled loudly so that there would be no question about who was calling Lazarus”. White claims that this event is a fulfillment of John chapter 5, where Jesus said that the day would come where the dead would hear the voice of God and be raised from the dead.  “Lazarus did not choose to become undead” says White. White contends that since Lazarus could not have said no to be resurrected from physical death, that this is a legitimate proof text to show that the Christian can not say no to God’s voice while spiritually dead.

Calvinist Charles Spurgeon writes about Lazarus,

The helpless paralytic cannot begin his own restoration. Enmity against God cannot choose love for him. The dead corpse of Lazarus could have no agency in recalling the vital spirit into itself. After Christ’s almighty power restored it, the living man could respond to the Savior’s command and rise and come forth.

Likewise, Arthur Pink says,

 “The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.” Lazarus in the grave, raised to life by the word of Christ, gives us a perfect illustration of God’s mighty work of grace in the hearts of His elect.”

Calvinist apologist, Loraine Boettner opines that,

Fallen man is as dead spiritually as Lazarus was dead physically until Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth!” He is as dead spiritually as the Pharisee Nicodemus, to whom Jesus said, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:3). Christ said to the Pharisees, “Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word” (Jn. 8:43). Apart from divine assistance, no one can hear the invitation or put forth the will to come to Christ.

A popular Southern Baptist website sums up the Calvinist interpretation of the story of Lazarus as follows,

The example of Jesus calling Lazarus from the grave is a common popular illustration that calvinists [sic] use to illustrate the phenomenon they call regeneration prior to repentance and saving faith. Calvinism teaches that God effectually calls the lost man with a dead heart and deaf ears to life so that he can THEN repent and believe and be saved. Calvinists use Jesus’ command outside Lazarus’ tomb to illustrate the power of the effectual call in regeneration; “Lazarus come forth” and he came to life. When God calls the elect to life, they like Lazarus have new life and are born again and begin to live as a child of God.

My point is that in this system the gospel is NOT THE POWER OF GOD UNTO CONVERSION because it has no power to save the unregenerate; only God can do that because the unregenerated person CANNOT or WILL NOT repent and believe to be saved. The unregenerate is like Lazarus in the tomb; he is dead and lifeless and has deaf ears that cannot hear the gospel.

THE PROBLEM

The entire problem with comparing Lazarus’ physical death and PHYSICAL resurrection to spiritual death and subsequently a spiritual resurrection is that the PHYSICAL resurrection was NOT MEANT to convey the raising of a SPIRITUALLY DEAD person to everlasting life, but:

1. To show Christ’s power over death and to symbolize His own physical resurrection from the dead (John 11:25, John 2:19, Acts 2:24).

2. To show to future resurrection of those who DIE IN CHRIST (John 6:40, Matt 22:30, Phil 3:11, 2 Tim 2:18, Rev 20:5-6).

3. That a believer does not have to wait until being physically resurrected for the assurance of salvation because Christ IS the resurrection.
To prove that Lazarus is a worthy example of Christ irresistibly saving a person spiritually dead in sin, it would obviously be necessary to prove that Lazarus was dead in sin otherwise the analogy is useless. However, Lazarus was ALREADY SAVED-of which Martha seems to agree (John 11:24)- when Christ raised him PHYSICALLY from the dead, so it is an erroneous analogy for the Calvinist to use the example of a SAVED DEAD PERSON as analogous to how Christ “quickens” a SPIRITUALLY DEAD person to life everlasting.

This then would force the Calvinist to conclude (as some have) that Lazarus was not saved until Christ raised him from the dead. This presents 2 problems with Calvinist theology. First of all, it conflicts with Hebrews 9:27, “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”. It would have Christ saving someone after they have died in their sinful state. Secondly, the Calvinists always affirm that God only loves His elect, and no others, but if Lazarus was not saved until he was raised from the dead, then John 11:36 presents a problem for the Calvinist here: “Then said the Jews, Behold how he loved him!”. Christ loved Lazarus BEFORE He raised him from the dead. Thus this would refute the Calvinist belief that God does not love the sinner, and proves that God can love someone prior to their salvation if in fact Lazarus was spiritually dead in sin. If the Calvinist objects that Lazarus was indeed elect, of course God would have loved him, then this serves to prove a point in which some Calvinists often object to that a person is regenerated and guaranteed salvation before they are actually saved (which would seem to be implied by the Calvinist view of predestination). It nevertheless displays a blatant contradiction in Calvinist theology that God does not love the person who is dead in sin.

Thus either the Calvinist has to admit that Lazarus was saved, or they must admit to a flaw in their theology about who Christ actually loves in addition to attempting to reconcile Christ bringing a spiritually dead person to everlasting life after he died in his sin. If Lazarus was saved, however, the Calvinist must deal with the erroneous analogy of Christ quickening an ALREADY SAVED person to life physically, to justify their theology of God quickening a spiritually dead person in his LOST state PRIOR to him actually being saved.

Any attempt to use Lazarus as an example of God quickening a person who supposedly has the inability to respond to or hear the gospel fails in light of Lazarus’ condition, and to add such a bogus private interpretation is an insult to the purpose behind Christ raising Lazarus from the dead:

“Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:” 1 Cor 15:36

Another problem that the Calvinist face with this view of Lazarus is Jesus’ answer to the Sadducees about who a wife will belong to among several husbands in the resurrection (Mark 12:18-23) to which Christ replied in verses 26-27,

And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

Now if the Calvinists contend that God reserves the elect unto salvation while they are spiritually dead in sin until the “effectual call” is given unto the spiritually dead person, and like Lazarus, he then comes to spiritual life, then this effectually makes God the God of the dead.

JOHN 5:21

The Calvinist often sites the story of Lazarus with John 5:21-25, where Jesus states,

 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:  That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.  Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

The first thing to notice about this passage which is in direct conflict with Calvinist theology is that the raising of the dead comes before the quickening: “For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them”. In Calvinist theology, the quickening always comes before the actually life giving spiritual resurrection.

Secondly, the Calvinists take the phrase “quickeneth whom he will” as an indication of God’s selecting only some to salvation. The verse does not offer any exclusions to parse out this quickening to a particular set of elect. The “whom he will” is in verse 24, “He that heareth my word AND BELIEVETH ON HIM THAT SENT ME, hath everlasting life”.

Thirdly, Jesus is specifically referring to a final resurrection from PHYSICAL death.  John 5:28-29 clarifies this passage,

Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which ALL that are in the graves shall hear his voice,  And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

For the Calvinist to argue that this verse applies to all who are spiritually dead being resurrected unto spiritual life, they would also have to argue that we are in spiritual instead of literal graves. Furthermore, if the Calvinists were consistent with their definition of ‘all’, then this verse would show that only ‘some’ hear the voice of God. But if only some hear the voice of God, then this verse would mean that there are those of the ‘some’ that hear the voice of God that end up awakening to the resurrection of damnation!

Fourthly, although the truth of salvation is certainly stated in John 5, that belief is necessary, and one can certainly make a useful analogy in a spiritually dead person hearing the voice of God and responding by faith unto salvation, there is nothing in this passage that indicates mans inability to do so that requires the quickening of God first by an irresistible effectual calling nor that the spiritually dead have the inability to hear the voice of God. In fact, John 5 expressly states that the dead as well as those saved in Christ hear the voice of God in John 5:29. Moreover, using the same logic used by the Calvinist in the definition of verses that use the type of “rise from the dead” language, we read in Ephesians 5:14 the command for a person to wake himself up and THEN Christ gives them light. Thus this explains why the Calvinist must force John 11 and John 5 together, when neither of the 2 passages have any allusion to the other, and are entirely different contexts.

And finally, to add the nail in the coffin of the Calvinist misinterpretation of John 5, we see the following verse that repudiate the doctrine of irresistible grace and determinism,

He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. (v 35) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.  And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. (vss 39-40).

Notice that Jesus did NOT say “Ye CAN NOT come”, He said “Ye WILL NOT come”.

There is absolutely no justification for using the story of Lazarus as a proof text for the Calvinist doctrines of Total Inability, Irresistible Grace, and their man-made distinction of the “effectual call” (The distinction that God generally calls all to salvation, but only enables the elect to respond). The story of Lazarus is a beautiful picture of Christ’s power over and conquering of death (1 Cor 15:56-57). It is a shame that this passage has been given the emphasis that has been imposed upon the text by Reformed theologians. Adam not only heard God’s voice, but responded to God in the Garden of Eden while he was considered spiritually dead in sin (Gen 3:9).  Such a view diminishes mans clear responsibility to willingly turn to Christ in repentance by faith and presents a gospel that is not supported by Scripture.

J/A

The Decrees of God

Posted: August 16, 2013 in Calvinism
Tags: , ,

By Dr Elisha Weismann

God’s Decrees
______________

Here is a list of all the decrees listed in the Bible. How do they stack up to what Calvinism says? How many decrees are there about predestination or election? How many of them were actually spoken by God? And how many of them were given in eternity instead of in time? Also, note there are a few things that God decreed that are NOT ETERNAL (Psalm 148:6 for example). Following are all of the decrees listed (decree, decrees, decreed) followed by a short summary of only 7 decrees of which are made by God. The definition of “decrees” as alleged by Calvinism and Reformed Theology is clearly not that which is shown from the Bible.
DECREE

2Ch 30:5 So they established a decree to make proclamation throughout all Israel, from Beersheba even to Dan, that they should come to keep the passover unto the LORD God of Israel at Jerusalem: for they had not done [it] of a long [time in such sort] as it was written.

Ezr 5:13 But in the first year of Cyrus the king of Babylon [the same] king Cyrus made a decree to build this house of God

Ezr 5:17 Now therefore, if [it seem] good to the king, let there be search made in the king’s treasure house, which [is] there at Babylon, whether it be [so], that a decree was made of Cyrus the king to build this house of God at Jerusalem, and let the king send his pleasure to us concerning this matter.

Ezr 6:1   Then Darius the king made a decree, and search was made in the house of the rolls, where the treasures were laid up in Babylon.

Ezr 6:3 In the first year of Cyrus the king [the same] Cyrus the king made a decree [concerning] the house of God at Jerusalem, Let the house be builded, the place where they offered sacrifices, and let the foundations thereof be strongly laid; the height thereof threescore cubits, [and] the breadth thereof threescore cubits;

Ezr 6:8 Moreover I make a decree what ye shall do to the elders of these Jews for the building of this house of God: that of the king’s goods, [even] of the tribute beyond the river, forthwith expenses be given unto these men, that they be not hindered.

Ezr 6:11 Also I have made a decree, that whosoever shall alter this word, let timber be pulled down from his house, and being set up, let him be hanged thereon; and let his house be made a dunghill for this.

Ezr 7:13 I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and [of] his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee.

Ezr 7:21 And I, [even] I Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree to all the treasurers which [are] beyond the river, that whatsoever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, shall require of you, it be done speedily,

Est 1:20 And when the king’s decree which he shall make shall be published throughout all his empire, (for it is great,) all the wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small.

Est 2:8 So it came to pass, when the king’s commandment and his decree was heard, and when many maidens were gathered together unto Shushan the palace, to the custody of Hegai, that Esther was brought also unto the king’s house, to the custody of Hegai, keeper of the women.

Est 3:15 The posts went out, being hastened by the king’s commandment, and the decree was given in Shushan the palace. And the king and Haman sat down to drink; but the city Shushan was perplexed

Est 4:3 And in every province, whithersoever the king’s commandment and his decree came, [there was] great mourning among the Jews, and fasting, and weeping, and wailing; and many lay in sackcloth and ashes.

lEst 4:8 Also he gave him the copy of the writing of the decree that was given at Shushan to destroy them, to shew [it] unto Esther, and to declare [it] unto her, and to charge her that she should go in unto the king, to make supplication unto him, and to make request before him for her people.

Est 8:14 [So] the posts that rode upon mules [and] camels went out, being hastened and pressed on by the king’s commandment. And the decree was given at Shushan the palace.

Est 8:17 And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king’s commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them

Est 9:1 Now in the twelfth month, that [is], the month Adar, on the thirteenth day of the same, when the king’s commandment and his decree drew near to be put in execution, in the day that the enemies of the Jews hoped to have power over them, (though it was turned to the contrary, that the Jews had rule over them that hated them;)

Est 9:13 Then said Esther, If it please the king, let it be granted to the Jews which [are] in Shushan to do to morrow also according unto this day’s decree, and let Haman’s ten sons be hanged upon the gallows

Est 9:14 And the king commanded it so to be done: and the decree was given at Shushan; and they hanged Haman’s ten sons.

Est 9:32 And the decree of Esther confirmed these matters of Purim; and it was written in the book

Job 22:28 Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established unto thee: and the light shall shine upon thy ways.

Job 28:28 And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that [is] wisdom; and to depart from evil [is] understanding.

Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Psa 148:6 He hath also stablished them for ever and ever: he hath made a decree which shall not pass

Pro 8:15 By me kings reign, and princes decree justice.

Pro 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

Isa 10:1  Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness [which] they have prescribed;

Jer 5:22 Fear ye not me? saith the LORD: will ye not tremble at my presence, which have placed the sand [for] the bound of the sea by a perpetual decree, that it cannot pass it: and though the waves thereof toss themselves, yet can they not prevail; though they roar, yet can they not pass over it?

Dan 2:9 But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, [there is but] one decree for you: for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can shew me the interpretation thereof.

Dan 2:13 And the decree went forth that the wise [men] should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain.

Dan 2:15 He answered and said to Arioch the king’s captain, Why [is] the decree [so] hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel.

Dan 3:10 Thou, O king, hast made a decree, that every man that shall hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, shall fall down and worship the golden image:

Dan 3:29 Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort.

Dan 4:6 Therefore made I a decree to bring in all the wise [men] of Babylon before me, that they might make known unto me the interpretation of the dream.

Dan 4:17 This matter [is] by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.

Dan 4:24 This [is] the interpretation, O king, and this [is] the decree of the most High, which is come upon my lord the king:

Dan 6:7 All the presidents of the kingdom, the governors, and the princes, the counsellors, and the captains, have consulted together to establish a royal statute, and to make a firm decree, that whosoever shall ask a petition of any God or man for thirty days, save of thee, O king, he shall be cast into the den of lions.

Dan 6:8 Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not

Dan 6:9 Wherefore king Darius signed the writing and the decree.

Dan 6:12 Then they came near, and spake before the king concerning the king’s decree; Hast thou not signed a decree, that every man that shall ask [a petition] of any God or man within thirty days, save of thee, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions? The king answered and said, The thing [is] true, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.

Dan 6:13 Then answered they and said before the king, That Daniel, which [is] of the children of the captivity of Judah, regardeth not thee, O king, nor the decree that thou hast signed, but maketh his petition three times a day.

Dan 6:15 Then these men assembled unto the king, and said unto the king, Know, O king, that the law of the Medes and Persians [is], That no decree nor statute which the king establisheth may be changed.

Dan 6:26 I make a decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel: for he [is] the living God, and stedfast for ever, and his kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed, and his dominion [shall be even] unto the end.

Jon 3:7 And he caused [it] to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:

Mic 7:11 [In] the day that thy walls are to be built, [in] that day shall the decree be far removed.

Zep 2:2 Before the decree bring forth, [before] the day pass as the chaff, before the fierce anger of the LORD come upon you, before the day of the LORD’S anger come upon you.

Luk 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

**************
DECREES
**************
Isa 10:1 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness [which] they have prescribed;

Act 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.

Act 17:7 Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, [one] Jesus.

**************
DECREED
**************

Est 2:1  After these things, when the wrath of king Ahasuerus was appeased, he remembered Vashti, and what she had done, and what was decreed against her.

Est 9:31 To confirm these days of Purim in their times [appointed], according as Mordecai the Jew and Esther the queen had enjoined them, and as they had decreed for themselves and for their seed, the matters of the fastings and their cry.

Job 38:10 And brake up for it my decreed [place], and set bars and doors,

Isa 10:22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, [yet] a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.

1Cr 7:37 Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.

****************

There are 7 decrees from God. Job 28:26 (about rain); Job 38:10 and Proverbs 8:29 (about the sea); Psalm 2:7 (about Jesus Christ); Psalm 148:6 (about the heavens); Isaiah 10:22 (about consumption surround a remnant of Israel) Jeremiah 5:22 (about the sand) and Daniel 4:24 (about Nebuchadnezzar).

None of these decrees mention anything about election or predestination, none of them show that God has ONE decree, and none of them are made in eternity, but made IN TIME. Furthermore, in Psalm 148:6, God makes a decree that is TEMPORARY because in 2 Peter 3:12 these things will be burned up.

Of such decrees when the Calvinist is forced to explain that which is not explicit in their view of “decrees”, Laurence Vance writes, “Unconditional Election is pawned off as the secret counsel of God that can’t be understood. Yet untold volumes have been written by Calvinists on the subject. So if the decree of predestination is a secret doctrine, how do the Calvinists know so much about it?…In the Bible however, the misappropriation of the decrees of God by the Calvinists is no laughing matter: “Woe unto them the decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed”. The Other Side of Calvinism, page 256.

___________________________________________

Rebuttal to Fred Butler’s Objection to this article here