Calvinism and God's Decree

Hey guys, it's Keith and welcome back to Conversations with a Calvinist. Today on the show I'm going to be discussing the subject of God's eternal decree, but I'm going to be doing it while trying to continue to win at Super Mario Brothers.

Yes, I still have not beaten Super Mario Brothers, and some of you have watched me play in the past and you know why. I am really bad at video games, but I thought it would be fun for those who watch, can watch me play the video game while I talk about God's eternal decree.

And for those of you who are simply listening to the podcast, just know that I'm going to be making random comments about the video game as I'm going through today talking about God's eternal decree. So without any further delay, we're going to jump into the game.

Now I have already begun the game. I got to the second level just so that I could sort of hit the ground running. And so I'm going to begin the game at the second level and begin talking about God's eternal decree.

The only thing that's going to be different from this one and times in the past of things that I've done is I am going to have to take some time to pause the game at certain points so that I can talk about certain things that I have to read, because I am going to be reading today from the Westminster Confession of Faith and from the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith, as well as I'm going to be reading a quote from James Pettigrew Boyce.

So stay tuned. We're going to be beginning the video game and the conversation about God's eternal decree right now. OK, last time I did this, somebody said they actually wanted to see me while playing because they said they didn't believe that I was actually playing and talking.

So this is the controller. It is in my hand and it is a Mario controller. So that's pretty cool. And I am here starting the second level now. This is Super Mario Brothers, the original for the Nintendo Entertainment System.

So let's see if I can get this going. And we're going to talk about God's eternal decree. Now, why am I wanting to talk about God's eternal decree? I think that this is one of the issues that people use to—and when I say this, I say attack Calvinism—this is one of the things I think people can get confused about in regard to Calvinism.

And part of the reason is, is because there isn't one monolithic view within Calvinism about what we mean when we talk about God's eternal decree. Now, I am going to, in a few moments, actually read to you from the Westminster Confession and from the London Baptist Confession.

But before I do that, I just want to address some just common things that people talk about when we talk about God's eternal decree. When we talk about a decree, we're talking about God determining all things that take place, and the fact that he determines them by a decree.

And we think of a decree as like a king making an edict or making some form of a determination whereby he says, this is what's going to happen, as opposed to something else. The king determines by decree what will happen, and therefore that's what we mean when we talk about God's eternal decree.

But the issue lies in how that decree actually works out and what is it encompassing. And most Calvinists would say God's decree encompasses everything, that everything happens because of God's decree.

And the very way that God knows what is going to happen is not simply because he looks down the corridor of time and sees what's going to happen, but rather God knows what's going to happen because he has decreed what's going to happen.

And so that becomes a major sticking issue with people who say, well, does that mean that God has decreed the evil actions of men? And this is where we begin to come into some of the disagreements among Calvinists and how people understand the idea of decree.

And so I want to sort of begin by talking about the spectrum of this topic and discussing sort of the different ways that people describe God's decree. And we might even say that this really references also God's sovereignty, because the sovereignty of God is what is in view when we talk about his decree, and of course sovereignty means his rule over all things.

God rules everything, and therefore when we talk about God being sovereign, we're saying God is the king—that's what a sovereign is—and he rules everything. And so when we talk about how God rules and how God makes his, if you will, makes things happen or determines that things happen, this is where the question of decree comes in.

And there is, as I said, there's a spectrum, and the way that I usually describe this when I'm teaching it—if I had a whiteboard I could show it—is it would be sort of like you've got three sides. You have the side on the left side that would be libertarianism, and libertarianism is the idea that man's will is completely free and is able to make choices in a sense independent of the decree of God because man is able to choose or not choose based upon his own will.

And therefore the choices that man makes are determined by his libertarian—and that's not libertarianism as we might think of libertarianism as a political position—but that's libertarian freedom, as in to say autonomous free will, meaning that a man is governed by his own will.

So that is what we mean by libertarian free will. And that is a pretty common view among a lot of people, and so we talk about libertarian free will. That is what I would say on one side of the spectrum, a very common view.

Now on the far other side of the spectrum, we might call that what I call hard determinism. Some people simply just call it determinism, but it's the idea that every thought, every action is caused by God, and when we talk about the word cause, this again comes up with another philosophical thing, what do we mean by cause?

Well, this is the idea that ultimately God is the one who is causing our thoughts and our actions all the time, and we can understand that that is something that not everyone believes, but there are those who do believe in a very hard view of determinism.

So I guess, again, the idea is a hard determinism. So you have libertarianism on one side, the idea that man's will is completely free, and he is able to do or not do according to his will, and then you have on the other side the position called hard determinism, where every single thought and action of man is ultimately caused by God.

And this is what some people would think that Calvinism teaches, and there are some Calvinists who teach this, but I don't believe that this is what we find in the Westminster or the London Baptist Confession.

And I am right now going to say that I know for sure that there are men who will disagree with me on this. There are those who would say on both sides that I'm either misrepresenting libertarianism or I'm misrepresenting determinism, and I can be honest with you when I say I'm not trying to do either.

I'm trying to represent them as best as I can and as best as I understand. But again, if I am misrepresenting, please, someone in the comments, correct me and let me know maybe what I mean or what I'm trying to say when I say hard determinism.

And again, I have people in my life I know who would identify themselves as determinists, hard determinists, and I've seen them even in debate debating from this position. So I know that they're out there, and I think that I'm representing them correctly, and if I'm misrepresenting them, it is certainly not my intention.

But that's not the position that I hold. I think that I should say that. I am not a hard determinist, neither am I a libertarian, or neither do I believe in libertarian freedom. So I would take an approach that some might call the middle road, but it is the position that I think most adequately describes the biblical data and what I would say was believed by those who framed the confessions.

And again, by that I'm meaning the London Baptist Confession and the Westminster Confession. Those two confessions, as many people know, are very, very similar. So in fact, we're going to read them in a moment and show just how similar they are.

Very, very similar. Okay. I always have trouble, jumping over to the video game real quick, I always have trouble with when I get to the eighth realm, for some reason I just can't figure it out. I just have no real finesse at this game.

I watched my wife beat this game. She's so good at it. She puts me to shame and she could come in and beat it. Somebody said I should do that. Somebody said I should talk about theology and let her beat the game.

And you have no idea how emasculating that would be if I actually came and let my wife beat this game while I watched her do it. That would be really rough on my heart. I just want to, at some point, I want to win this game while bringing you all with me.

And again, I don't do this often. I just thought it would be fun to do this week. The podcast this week is this, is me talking about determinism, because I've been wanting to talk about that for a while, or God's decree.

So this is just something fun to do in the background while I talk about this. Also, I want to make mention that I have some really cool podcasts that are scheduled very soon. I have a great interview that I'm looking forward to doing next week.

And I'm not going to announce yet who they are, just in case something happens and they don't work out. But I am looking forward to an interview and I'm possibly hosting a debate on my show. So I'm like super excited about, I have one man left.

I'm super excited about what's happening, what's coming soon on the podcast. So for those of you who enjoy the podcast, thank you for continuing to listen. Thank you for continuing to watch. I know many of you have found me through my short videos, and I hope that you also would check out the long form content, because many of my podcasts are designed to give you some real good background on Calvinism.

Of course, the show is called Conversations with a Calvinist, so we often talk about Calvinistic things, but we talk about other things as well. All right, so I've lost the game. That does not mean I'm going to stop.

But I'm going to do something different. Okay, so I've decided to switch to a different game. I'm going to play Excitebike for a minute while I talk. This is one of my favorite games when I was a kid, so I was never good at this either, but at least I'll have some fun while I'm talking.

Compatibilism and the Meaning of God's Decree

Okay, so I said that there was two positions, the one on either side, the position of libertarianism and the position of hard determinism. Now I want to talk about my position, because my position would be in the middle, at least in the sense that it would not be hard determinism or libertarianism.

My position would be something called compatibilism. Now compatibilism means that while God has decreed all things, that that does not mean that men do not make legitimate decisions, but that those decisions, those choices that man make, are ultimately compatible with God's will, because he is working out his ultimate decree or plan in time.

And therefore, God ensures that the decisions that we make, the things that we do, do not thwart his plan. And so man still makes legitimate decisions, but God is sovereign over those decisions, and therefore those decisions are part of his decree.

So with that being said, I want to now do what I said I was going to do before, is I want to jump over and actually read the confessions, because I think the confessions bear out what I am going to say.

So let's jump over here and look at the confessions. Let's look first at the one that was the older one, is the Westminster Confession. The Westminster Confession was written in 1646, the Second London Confession was written in 1689, so the Westminster Confession does precede the Second London Confession.

So here is the Westminster Confession. It says in Chapter 3 of God's Eternal Decree, All right, so right there, before we even read the next part, let's just unpack that for a minute. God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatever comes to pass.

And so we see there, even though the word decree is the title of the chapter, we see that what's being referred to is God ordaining, and again, this comes down to how we understand these words. What does ordain mean?

What does it mean when we say something is ordained? Does that mean that God causes everything in the sense that he's forcing on people certain decisions and forcing them to do certain things? Or does it mean something else?

How do we understand the word ordained there? And so looking back at it again, it goes on, and it gives some scripture verses. Of course, it references Ephesians 1, Romans 11, Hebrews 6, Romans 9, and it references Romans 9 twice.

Then it says,. And it references James 1 in two places and 1 John 1. So very clearly, the writers of this confession understood how their words could be interpreted, and they wanted to ensure that their words are not misinterpreted as to make God the author of sin.

So it says,. And then it says,. And then, of course, it gives several scripture verses, and I have them up on the screen. If you'd like to pause and write them down, if you're watching this on YouTube, you can pause and write this down and be able to look those up on your own.

So we see that the framers of the Westminster Confession are putting in this paragraph the important nature of the will of man, that they're recognizing, rather, the nature of the will of man, saying that God is not the author of sin, thereby man is the author of sin.

Also, violence is not offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of secondary causes—second causes—taken away, but rather established. So second causes, as I understand it, are the acts of people in time.

The people who do things in time are bringing about these—they are one of the things that would be considered a second cause. So God, in one sense, does cause all things, but not without the secondary causes.

And so one of the ways that I've heard this described, and I believe it was Dr. James White who described it, and I think it was helpful for me, at least, he said, if you imagine a group of football players, and that group of football players were thirsty.

And so in a locker room, there was a bucket of water that was sitting on a table. And so the men ran into the room, and they started drinking the water. You could say, well, God wanted that water to be—he wanted that bucket to be empty.

He wanted the water to be extinguished or put away. So God has determined that those men would come in and that they would be thirsty at that time so that that water could be done. God could have certainly miraculously caused that water to simply evaporate.

He could have done all kinds of things, but he chose to use the secondary cause of those men to bring about the action in time of the water being drank by them. And therefore, that is the—that was probably a really bad way of describing that, but as far as my—I didn't give the illustration well.

So essentially, the idea is you have a bucket of water. The bucket of water is—God wants the water to be gone, so he can do it in one of two ways. He can either miraculously cause the water to evaporate, or he can use the thirsty football players who just came in after a long practice to be the means by which he brings about the water being done away with.

And therefore, the secondary causes are still a part of God's decree because God has determined the things that bring this about, but it is not—the secondary causes weren't done away with. They were actually used by God.

And this is where it talks about violence done to the will of the creature. What does it mean to do violence? God is not—God is not acting on the will of the creature in such a way that he is causing evil in their hearts because the person has a sinful nature.

He has been born with a sinful nature because he is born a son of Adam, and he has inherited Adam's sinful nature. Now again, this is something that not everybody agrees with. Not everybody agrees that that man inherits Adam's sinful nature, but that is something that has been believed for—well, I believe it's something taught in Scripture, of course, but that is something that the Church has believed for a long time.

Even within Roman Catholicism, there is a belief in what would be called the doctrine of original sin, the doctrine that man is born with a sinful nature. And while some people don't necessarily believe that, I do believe that the Bible teaches that, and I do believe that that teaching can be established by the Scripture.

So when we say a man is sinful, that is his nature, that is, he is—his heart is wicked, and he desires the things that oppose God. And so if God uses a man and his wicked desires to bring about his purposes, God is free to do that.

God is free to use a man and to use his desires to bring about his purposes. But God is also able and does often restrain the evil of men, and one of my favorite examples of this is in the biblical account of Abimelech, who had taken the wife of Abram, Sarai, to be one of his concubines, and God kept him from taking her and sleeping with her.

And so God did the work of restraining the evil heart of Abimelech for the purpose of protecting Sarai and ultimately bringing about the protection of the line of Abram, which would come when they become Abraham and Sarah, would give birth to Isaac, and of course ultimately bring about the birth of Jesus Christ.

And so God had a purpose in restraining the heart of Abimelech, and I don't think anybody would deny—even those who would deny that God has an eternal decree—no one would deny that God has the power to restrain the evil hearts of men.

And so the question is, why does God not restrain all of men's evil? And there are two answers. One would say because God wants man to have the freedom to do as he chooses, and the other answer would be that God has a purpose in those things.

He has a purpose in men's evil actions, and God has decreed those things will be in the sense that he has decreed not to restrain those men, but allow them to exercise their evil nature in such a way that it brings about his purpose.

And so we could argue that many of the times in the Old Testament when we see the people of God receiving judgment from evil, wicked nations, that God actually had a purpose in those evil nations bringing judgment upon the people of God.

That is what we see. However, some would say, well, those men who were doing those wicked things were doing them all based upon their own libertarian free will. Well, yes, they were doing what they wanted to do.

But the problem is that to say that it was all their will, we could say, no, God had a purpose in it, because if God did not have a more perfect purpose in it, it would not have happened, because God has determined what will happen because ultimately he has a greater purpose in the evil actions of those men.

So again, this comes down to the issue of the question of how much is God actively working in the hearts and in the lives of people throughout every day. And Calvinists would say God is always actively working in time, because we believe that if there was anything outside of God's decree, if there was anything that God was—if there was anything that could thwart his determining, thwart his decree, then that one thing could be the thing that kept his plan from unfolding as he has determined it.

And God has determined his plan from all eternity, and his plan will not be thwarted. And therefore, men do make decisions, but they will never make a decision that is ultimately outside of God's plan, because God's plan will be worked out.

And that's going to bring me—now I'm going to go back out to where I can read a little bit, and I want to show you the quote I mentioned earlier. I mentioned I had a quote from James Pettigrew Boyce. So let me bring up this quote from James Pettigrew Boyce.

James Pettigrew Boyce says this, The term decree is liable to some misapprehension. And I do believe that. I think that he hits us on the nose. And by the way, this is from his book, The Abstract of Systematic Theology, and it's one of the best systematic theologies that I have on my shelf, in the sense that he—James Pettigrew Boyce makes many things very clear.

And if you're unfamiliar with Boyce, he was the first president of the Southern Seminary. This is a brilliant man. And he is recognizing that the term decree can cause apprehension, it can cause problems, it can cause people to be confused.

And so because of that, he writes this. He says, The term decree is liable to some misapprehension and objection because it conveys the idea of an edict or of some compulsory determination. Just like I said at the beginning, some people don't like the word decree because they think that that means that God is the one causing evil actions, causing men to do terrible things.

God is introducing fresh evil into their heart. And so he says, Purpose has been suggested as a better word. Plan will sometimes still be more suitable. The mere use of these words will remove from many some difficulties and prejudices which make them unwilling to accept this doctrine.

They perceive that in the creation, preservation, and government of the world, God must have had a plan and that that plan must have been just, wise, and holy, tending both to his own glory and the happiness of his creatures.

They recognize that a man who has no purpose nor aim, especially in important matters, and who cannot or does not devise the means by which to carry out his purpose is without wisdom and capacity and unworthy of his nature.

Consequently, they readily believe and admit that the more comprehensive and at the same time the more definite is the plan of God, the more worthy it is of infinite wisdom. Indeed, they are compelled to the conclusion that God cannot be what he is without forming such a purpose or plan.

So again, James Pettigrew Boyce is making an important distinction here. He's saying, okay, you don't like the word decree. That's fine. A lot of people have trouble with the word decree, and he recognizes that.

He says, a lot of people have trouble with the word decree. That's fine. Do you have trouble saying God has a plan? And that is his point. He's saying, if you say God having a decree is a problem, then here's a solution.

Say that God has a plan. And again, I don't know too many people who would argue that God does not have a plan. I mean, I guess there are some. Or that all things are not part of God's plan. And then this comes back to the big issue, right?

Has God decreed the sin or has God decreed all things and the sins in the heart of men? Those things are part of God's plan. He is working out his plan from the beginning. And by the way, I'm just going to mention the video game.

I don't know what's happened or where I am in Excitebike, but I can't even move forward without turning the motorcycle over. So I'm going to, I'm actually going to come out of this. This is not, I'm not able to do this very well.

So get back here and I'll go back to the video game in just a second. But that's the point, right? God has a plan. God has a purpose and working all things out. And then you have to take a step back and you say, well, how comprehensive is this plan?

God planned for the cross. I don't think anyone would deny that who believes the Bible. The Bible clearly teaches that the cross was determined by God to be in his plan from the very beginning of creation.

And because God planned and purposed the cross, all of the things that had to take place to lead to the cross were in that plan. And therefore, this was a comprehensive plan that included all things, because if there was anything that wasn't included in the plan, that could have been the thing that thwarted the plan.

And so that is the way if we step back and say, okay, if we don't like the word decree, let's talk about this word plan. Did God have a plan for the cross? Yes, he did. Is God working out everything necessary for that plan?

And here's a good for instance, we can go back and we can trace the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ all the way back to Abram and even before Abram, we can go all the way back before him and we can trace the line of Christ.

We know that God chose Judah. We know that God chose David. We know that God chose these men to be in the ancestral line of the Lord Jesus Christ. So those things were planned by God. He decreed that those things would be.

So that means that there was never a time where the line of Judah could be genuinely imperiled by the evil actions of men, because God had a purpose and plan in that line that was going to bring about Christ and had that line been cut off by, let's say, a massive war that was brought about by the libertarian free will of an evil dictator or something else that was happening that was simply by the free will of some individual, then that is something that could have thwarted the plan of God.

And we know that that could not happen. God had determined the cross, and therefore the cross was going to happen. And so we have to begin to step back and say, well, how many other things are also a part of that?

How about the birth of Judas Iscariot, right? The birth of Judas Iscariot, you know, was certainly planned by God, because God had determined that this was going to be a man that Jesus raised up as an apostle, but also the man who was called the son of perdition, the one who was going to betray him.

And it says in John 6 that he knew from the beginning who was going to betray him. Jesus knew this man. He knew what he was going to do. And some people say, well, that's just bare foreknowledge. Okay.

Again, Calvinists would say foreknowledge is not just God seeing what's going to happen, but God has determined that this will be what is going to happen, because not only does he have exhaustive foreknowledge, but he has a plan.

He is working out his plan, and it includes the rejection of Jesus by Judas. And did Judas do what he did because he desired to do it? Yes. Did he do it because it was his will to do it? Absolutely. Did God introduce fresh evil into the heart of Judas?

I don't believe that he did. And that comes back to something R .C. Sproul often talked about. God didn't need to introduce fresh evil into the heart of Judas, because Judas was a sinful man. He had a sinful heart, and therefore his decision was in accordance with his will.

And God chose that that would be the way that it would work out. And yet Judas is still responsible. This goes back again, if we want to look at it one more time, just looking back at the Westminster.

It says, nor is evil offered or violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of secondary causes taken away. Again, this is the writers of the Westminster Confession saying that violence was not done to the will of Judas, neither was his liberty necessarily taken away.

He did exactly what he wanted to do. But what he did was also compatible with the will of God, because it was in the plan of God, and therefore it was part of God's decree. Now let's look real quick at the Second London Confession.

I haven't given up on the video game yet, but I'm not sure if I'm going to go back to it, because this is important. So the Second London Baptist Confession says this. Very similar wording, but not exactly the same.

It says, from all eternity, God decreed everything that occurs without reference to anything outside himself. Now that sounds a little bit more deterministic even than the Westminster Confession, but we're going to see that it goes on to say some very similar things that the Westminster said.

It says, he did this by the perfectly wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably. And again, if we just quickly jump to the Westminster, freely and unchangeably ordain whatever comes past.

You can see very similar wording here. Yet God did this in such a way that he is neither the author of sin, nor has fellowship with any in their sin. Very specific wording there, saying God is not entering into a fellowship with man in this sinful act.

The sinful act is seated at the feet of man. This decree does not violate the will of the creature or take away the free working or contingency of second causes. Again, the man and the men, men have the ability to make legitimate choices, and they do.

On the contrary, these are established by God's decree. In this decree, God's wisdom is displayed in directing all things, and his power and faithfulness are demonstrated in accomplishing his decree. So again, the writers of both the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Second London Baptist Confession go to great lengths to establish an understanding of God's decree, which includes the secondary causes of men's actions as part of God's plan.

And again, I did change the word there, because I do believe when we talk about God's decree, we can just as easily include the word plan. I think James Pettigrew Boyce hit that nail on the head very well when he said we can talk about if the word decree bothers you, then replace it with the word plan or with the word purpose.

Because anyone who says God is doing what he does without a purpose, that doesn't make sense from a biblical perspective. Because in Scripture, God clearly has determined that certain things happen. God clearly determines the cross.

God clearly determines the birth of Jesus Christ, where he's going to be born. And he determined that through divine prophecy, said this is where it's going to take place. And not just through mere foreknowledge, where he simply saw what was going to happen, but God determined what was going to happen.

He said, this is it. And it won't be another way. It won't be thwarted. And therefore, if we say God's decree works out in his purpose or his plan, if that satisfies the concern for the word decree, then I think that that is useful.

And again, going back to James Pettigrew Boyce's thing, he says this. He says, the term decree is liable to some misapprehension and objection because it conveys the idea of an edict or of some compulsory determination.

Purpose has been suggested as a better word. Plan will sometimes be still more suitable. And so that would be my encouragement to people who are having trouble with the idea of God's decree. It's simply when I talk about God's decree, I'm talking about God's comprehensive, complete and perfect plan that he is working out and that we can't see always and we don't always understand.

Many of you have heard this illustration, but I'll give it to you, give it to those who haven't. And it's the illustration of the man who visits the store where he's looking at the ornate rugs that are hanging from the ceiling.

It's a store that's known for beautiful and ornate handmade woven rugs. And he goes to purchase a rug and as he's walking through the store, he recognizes there are beautiful rugs and some of them many thousands of dollars.

But he comes upon one rug that is just completely ugly and it has no design. It has no seeming purpose. All of the knots are visible and everything is very rugged and very ugly. And the man is just confused how such a ugly rug can be in the midst of all of these ornate and beautiful and wonderfully designed rugs.

And so he calls the man who owns the store over and he says, sir, this doesn't make sense to me. Why do you have this ugly rug in the midst of a store filled with beautiful rugs? And the man said, sir, you are looking at it from the wrong side.

And he stopped for a minute and recognized that what he was looking at was the back of the rug where all you see are knots and all you see is an imperceivable pattern. And so he walks around to the other side and he's able to see the beauty and the design of that rug.

Well when we look at the world and we look at all that is going on around us and we see all of the mass hysteria of the problems and issues that are going on today, much the same as has always gone on, even though we have things going on today that are maybe new in regard to world history, things like the transgender movement and all that, ultimately in history there's always been terrible things.

There have always been those who do outlandish and things that are just completely sinful and ungodly. The ugliness has been in the world since the fall. And yet, if we could see it from God's perspective, God is causing all things to work together for the good of those who love him and are called according to his purpose.

That promise that is in Romans chapter 8 verse 28, God causes all things to work together for the good of those who love him and are called according to his purpose. And without going even further to talk about him foreknowing and predestining and those things, just that one phrase, God causing all things to work together, that's what we mean when we talk about God's decree, at least that's what I mean when I talk about God's decree.

And I realize there are those who might say that I'm not deterministic enough, and I would realize there were those who say I'm too deterministic. And so I do think that there are going to be people who are very unhappy with what I've said because I've not represented, because I'm not where they are.

Hopefully I've represented positions correctly, but there are those who are more deterministic, there are those who are more libertarian. But I would say compatibilism is where I am, and it would simply be that God's decree is being worked out, and it includes the actions of men in time, and that men do make decisions according to their wills, according to their desires, as God is working in and through those decisions to bring about His ultimate purpose and plan.

And therefore, when we see the world, and we see all the ugliness in the world, and we see all the things that men are doing that are evil, we can say, yes, those are evil, terrible things, and they're bad things, and it looks like that ugly back of the rug.

But God, in His perfection and in eternity, is working all things together for the good of those who love Him, so He can see the beautiful side of the rug while we can't yet see the ugly side of the rug.