I know that you believe nothing happens without God's help or without God offering. I still do not know how you use the word "cooperation". Are there any human examples that would describe what you mean? Let's say my boss thought to himself (ordained) that he was going to have me complete a task. He then orders me to do it and I comply (unconditional election). Assume it would never have occurred to me to complete the task, had I not been ordered to. If you say that I cooperated in a loosely similar manner to salvation, then I would say fine. But I don't think you look at it this way. :)
"Can God make a rock that He cannot pick up"? Can God save all men if all men are to have free will? In the latter question, we must hold BOTH as true, despite our inability to completely solve this mystery.
The answer to the first question is "No". God's omnipotence does not mean He can do anything conceivable, it means He can do anything within the bounds of His nature. In a similar way, God cannot cease to exist, and God cannot sin. To create such a rock would be to create something bigger than Himself. This is impossible because it goes against His nature, that of being infinite.
Likewise, the answer to the second question is also "No". God cannot save all men, if all men are to have free will in the Catholic sense, as I understand it. If man's free will inevitably leads away from God, and God is not in total control of salvation, God needs cooperation, then there is no way God could save all men. That is, if God's nature were really like this. Of course I do not think it is.
Free will is not free if there is no choice. When something becomes a necessity, it is not free. Are you making a free will choice when someone puts a gun to your head and tells you to do something? No, your are being coerced.
This is what I thought your view was. That's why I keep saying I think the salvation decision, under your view, is made independently of God. I don't mean in opposition to God, but rather separately from God. I see God as accomplishing our own salvations through us. I know you don't see it that way. I see your view being that man finishes his own salvation through his free will, independent of God, i.e., not coerced. BTW, I don't think coercion only works in the negative sense. Coercion could also be God opening our eyes to a "decision" which is really no decision at all.
"There is no greater love than this, that a man die for his friends".
This is the quote I said didn't apply. :) In my example, there was no reason for me to jump, it wasn't necessary. Therefore, it couldn't be an act of love. That's why I disagree with you when you say that Christ died unnecessarily and it was still an act of love from Him. If it was unnecessary, then it was suicide, a sin.
You make God the Father out to be a blood-thirsty tyrant, rather than a loving Father. Christ obeyed the Father's Will to the end. You call Christ's death suicide, but it is ultimate trust in His Father's love.
You're not at all addressing the issue of necessity. That's the only thing I have been talking about.
I think it would be more proper to say that sin is NOT an existence, but a lack of an existence, namely, good. Thus, God did not create on non-existence. At least that is the concept that the Greek and Latin Fathers have taught from 1500-1700 years ago.
I actually fully agree with you that evil is an absence of God, like dark is an absence of light, so you are right. However, I'm not so sure the Orthodox see it that way. I seem to remember a few posts to the effect that evil was an actual "thing" that exists independently of good, but I can't remember who said it, so... :)
Or we can say that God foresees what it would take for a man to choose "A" and place the correct circumstances in man's path to choose "A".
If the correct circumstances guaranteed the result, then we might be on the same page. But I don't think you are willing to go there. :)
This is what the Orthodox believe:
The Mystery of Evil (from "I believe: A Short Exposition of the Orthodox Doctrine" )
The sinner dies, not because God slays him in punishment so that He might revenge Himself on him—for man cannot offend God, nor does God experience any satisfaction at the death of a man—the sinner dies because he has alienated himself from the Source of Life.
God is not responsible for evil, nor is He its cause. Neither is God blameworthy because He created man's nature with the possibility of alienating itself. If He had created human nature without free will, by this imposed condition He would have rendered the created intelligent being purely passive in nature; the creature would simply submit, not having the possibility of doing otherwise, since it would not be free.
However, God wished that, after a fashion, we too should be His co-workers in His creation and be responsible for our own eternal destiny. God knows in His infinite wisdom how to transform the causes of evil into that which is profitable for man's salvation.
Thus God uses the consequences of evil so as to make roses bloom forth from the thorns, although He never desired the thorns, nor did He create them in order to use them as instruments. He permitted these things to exist out of respect for our freedom.
Thus God permits trials and sufferings without having created them. When suffering comes upon me, I must receive this as an unfathomable proof of His love, as a blessing in disguise and without feeling indignant, I must seek out its significance.
As for temptations, I must avoid them, and for the sake of humility, beseech God to spare me from them, even as our Saviour teaches us in the Lord's Prayer: "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. "Yet, in all trials, temptations, and sufferings, we conclude our prayer as did the Saviour in the garden of Gethsemane: "Not My will, but Thine be done" (Luke 22:42)."
I am sure our Latin brothers share the exact same orthodox belief.
The Bible makes it clear that we will be judged for eternal heaven or hell based on our response to the Christ. While God moves us to choose His will, we know He does NOT force us, because even the regenerate sin, and CAN fall away. Perhaps it might help if you consider who is responsible for a man being condemned to hell. Is it man or is it God's fault - and why? If you say it is man who condemns himself (along with unanimous opinion of the Church Fathers), then MAN is part of the formula. Man is presented with an option, God helps man make this choice. If a man is saved for heaven, it is because that man responded to God's gifts. It is God who is responsible. If man is not saved, it is man's fault, as the gifts were present.
A real world example? One used by St. Augustine and St. Thomas might help. The sun shines equally on all people as a gift of light to mankind. We remain in this light - unless we willingly shut our eyes to it. We remain in darkness on account of our own will. We remain in the light because the light is there and we do not reject it.
The answer to the first question is "No". God's omnipotence does not mean He can do anything conceivable, it means He can do anything within the bounds of His nature.
And you have answered the question on why God does not save all people, even though He greatly desires all men to be saved. God has decided to give man free will - which, logically speaking, means the possibility of rejection. Will is not free if something can not be rejected. Do you or do you not believe that man has free will? Can you, in any given moment, choose to reject a commandment of God?
If man's free will inevitably leads away from God, and God is not in total control of salvation, God needs cooperation, then there is no way God could save all men. That is, if God's nature were really like this. Of course I do not think it is.
Read from verse 18 to the end of Romans 1. Consider what IS the wrath of God...It is leaving men to their own will. God holds out proof of His existence, even to the pagans. They have a Law written on their heart (as per Romans 2). Even they are without excuse. We, with THIS LAW, CAN obey it - or choose not to obey it. But if we choose not to, God does what? He leaves man to their devices. Now, is not God "awaiting" our response in this example? Strictly speaking, He is not - He knows what we will choose. But He allows us to choose it without executing miraculous infusions of grace to individuals. Forcing men to "believe" in God is not what love is about.
That's why I keep saying I think the salvation decision, under your view, is made independently of God. I don't mean in opposition to God, but rather separately from God. I see God as accomplishing our own salvations through us.
God accomplishes two desires at once when a man chooses God - the man is saved, and the man chose God freely. Man doesn't choose God separately, because God is intimately intertwined in all of our decisions. No one can take our thoughts and actions and divide them up and say "this part was God, and this part was me". We know, from Scriptures and experience, though, that we CAN choose. Consider the people who SAW the splitting of the Red Sea, SAW the water come from the rock, SAW the manna, etc. - and STILL turned from God, dying in the desert before seeing the promised land.
Therefore, it couldn't be an act of love. That's why I disagree with you when you say that Christ died unnecessarily and it was still an act of love from Him. If it was unnecessary, then it was suicide, a sin.
I didn't say Christ died unnecessarily! I said that God the Father could have chosen a different manner of saving mankind. But once the Father chose to show His love for man through such a means, it remained for Christ to obey His Will. Certainly, Jesus didn't die unnecessarily!
You're not at all addressing the issue of necessity. That's the only thing I have been talking about.
What makes something that God does "necessary"? Is God forced to do anything? You might say it is necessary for us, but for God, nothing is "necessary".
However, I'm not so sure the Orthodox see it that way. I seem to remember a few posts to the effect that evil was an actual "thing" that exists independently of good, but I can't remember who said it, so... :)
IF someone said that, it would be close to Oriental dualism that the Orthodox, to my knowledge, abhor. Perhaps someone reading this will reply to that.
If the correct circumstances guaranteed the result, then we might be on the same page. But I don't think you are willing to go there. :)
Just because God arranged things doesn't mean we don't have a free choice, does it? Even in such a scenario, WE still are making the decision - AND there IS the possibility of choosing "wrongly". We don't have a choice taken away because God tries to arrange things so that we are more likely to answer "yes". In the end, we ALWAYS can say "no". Thus, our will remains intact, while God guides our wills and desires to please Him.
Regards