The Narrow Path Ministries

Calvinists often talk about meticulous providence, which seems to mean that God decreed/foreordained all things before the foundations of the world.

When I read about compatibilism, I read a lot about Edwards and his popular theory that every choice we make is in accordance with our greatest desire and since God controls our nature and desires, he determines the outcomes of our choices.

I understand this (although I disagree with the part about God controlling our nature and desires), but what do compatibilists say about those things that don't appear to involve choosing? How does God ensure that they come about?

For Example...
Q1 When I turn and see a ball coming toward my face, I throw up my hands. Did I unconsciously make a rapid choice to raise my hands? (I'm not opposed to this being a decision made in accordance with my greatest desire. I know the mind can process information in amazing ways and I know I have a great desire not to get hit by a ball in the nose!)

A1 I suspect Calvinists would say this was an unconscious choice made in accordance with my greatest desire.

Q2 When a doctor taps below my knee and I kick, did my brain unconsciously make a rapid choice or would Calvinists say that reflexes operate in a purely physical realm that doesn't involve mental processing?

A2 I suspect Calvinists would say this was nothing more than a reflexive action that involved no mental processing. But God ensured that it came to pass by controlling the doctor's prior decision to tap my leg.

Q3 When I smell pizza, I immediately think, I want pizza! Did I choose to think this thought? (How did God ensure I would think this exact thought?)

A3 I suspect Calvinists would say that my thought was not a choice but God ensured that I would think that thought by creating me with a strong desire for pizza & controlling my prior choice to leave my home and walk around the block (because he decreed that my neighbor would choose to buy Pizza--since that was his greatest God-given desire.)

Are there any Calvinists (or people knowledgeable about Calvinism) who can let me know if I'm correctly understanding meticulous providence from a compatibilist POV? I guess this is a question about "means" and "ends."

Hi bro,

I am not a Calvinist, but I have had interactions with many and can tell you that the phrase means and ends is used to explain a lot in Calvinism.

What I really wonder about is how Calvinists explain the means by which God brings about the exact thoughts in the minds of every human that he decreed they think.

There may be exceptions, but every Calvinist I've heard talk about God's sovereignty stresses that God's sovereignty necessitates his absolute control over absolutely everything. But the only way I can see that he perfectly control the exact thoughts 24 hours a day of every human is by planting his thoughts in our heads. (I know MacArthur says God ordained everything and renders it certain. He also says foreknowledge really means foreordination.)

psimmond wrote:What I really wonder about is how Calvinists explain the means by which God brings about the exact thoughts in the minds of every human that he decreed they think.

There may be exceptions, but every Calvinist I've heard talk about God's sovereignty stresses that God's sovereignty necessitates his absolute control over absolutely everything. But the only way I can see that he perfectly control the exact thoughts 24 hours a day of every human is by planting his thoughts in our heads. (I know MacArthur says God ordained everything and renders it certain. He also says foreknowledge really means foreordination.)

Some Calvinist tend to hop on the old dialectical rocking horse. If you had a rocking horse as a child, you know that you can only go so far in one direction before you inevitably start going the other way. This analogy fits Calvinism to a T. On one hand, they argue that God meticulously ordained everything that comes to pass, but when they realize the horrible ramifications of such,(God ordaining child molesters, rapist, murderers, etc..)they will rock back to the depravity of man.

I am not sure you will get an answer from Calvinist on this one. It may be one of those Calvinist mysteries.

brody196, you're probably right that it would just be another mystery; I was just wondering if Calvin, Edwards, or someone like Piper or White ever addressed how exact thoughts are rendered certain according to Calvinism.

I've heard a lot of explanations about how choices are rendered certain but realized I've never heard anyone talk about the thoughts that precede the choices.

Isn't there always some mystery? I wonder, did God meticulously decree everything before He knew it or did He know everything before He decreed it?

Does He know everything that He Himself is ever going to say or do, or does He only know everything about our futures (if you think that He does)?

I chalk all of this up to our inability to understand God, and that's fine (makes sense, actually).

Does He know everything that He Himself is ever going to say or do

Then God can never think a new thought, He already thought it!

When it comes to Bbiblical inspiration do Calvinists tend to believe in verbal plenary inspiration--God downloaded the words directly into their heads and the writers then transferred this information to parchment?

If so, perhaps for the Calvinist this theory extends to all human thoughts and therefore to all speech and writing.

While Arminians sometimes embrace verbal plenary inspiration because they think it is the most logical way to ensure inerrancy, it seems Calvinists might say that in a sense all human thoughts (good, bad, sad, happy, wise, foolish, etc.) must be inerrant because they must perfectly align with the thoughts that God decreed and ordained for them to think.

Would it be blasphemous from a consistent Calvinist POV to say the Koran is inerrant (or at least God-breathed) because it perfectly aligns--character for character--with the thoughts God placed in Mohammed's head? The thoughts that God decreed and then rendered certain for him to think and write down? (Of course this wouldn't mean that it was true because God ordains all things, good and bad.)

Homer wrote:Then God can never think a new thought, He already thought it!

I'm not sure that God (Spirit, not incarnate) could have a new thought. In fact, if we define thinking as reasoning or formulating ideas, I'm not even sure that God thinks. I think it's more likely that God knows and acts.

Go easy on me if what I said makes no sense, because it seems to make sense in my little brain.