Posted on 11/13/2006 11:01:10 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg
I thought His purpose was to lead us to all truth. My mistake. ;O)
Therefore, how do you know that in Col 3:12, Paul is using the term 'elect' to mean "elect to glory" and not "elect to grace"? – Post 493
I never claimed, nor do I believe, that God "elects them and then unelects them". – Post 494
You make three statements in a row that either contradict one another or simply show the silliness of your argument. You claim that you haven’t described what it means to be “elected” (Post 492); yet in Post 493 you claim that the term could mean “elect to grace”. Are you saying this is the definition or do you just wish to argue? In post 494 you tell me that God can’t “unelect” people but you offer no definitions. How do you know without a definition? I would tend to agree with Post 494 in which you state that you have not defined the term elect. In fact, I would go so far as to say that it is impossible for you to defined the term “elect” at this point.
You can’t and have not define elect. You can’t and have not define faith. You tell me the Holy Spirit has no purpose and you cannot point me to any concise Catholic teaching on the Holy Spirit nor can you define Him. And you clearly don’t understand the Catholic position on atonement. At this point I would suggest you should investigate Scott Hahn’s theology course, not me as someone pointed out. I would hope that he would know a bit more about these matters.
It's the "free will is previewed by God" that just doesn't ring true to me, x. Nothing precedes God's determining will.
Yes, I believe that, and nothing I wrote disagrees with it.
If He thought it at the moment of creation, then it's set in stone because even His hypothetical "change of mind" would be factored into His omnipotent knowledge of His own creation.
I also agree with you here. I would probably use the expression, "decided at the moment of creation," instead of "thought it..." The "factored" in part is almost a synonymous statement for what I said.
We are as God wills, one beat behind. From our perspective, life is happenstance. From God's perspective, it's all yesterday's headlines.
That's exactly what I was saying. You've simply said it a different way.
For those who believe in His Son, that's the good news of the Gospel. He has redeemed His flock because it pleased Him to do so from before the foundation of the world, before anyone could do anything good or evil "that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth."
And, finally, I agree with that. No one had done anything good or evil, and, in fact, no one existed at that point before creation except for Almighty God. And all has been done for His purpose, and it is not according to the works of any created being.
In the case of baptism, they do not.
If not, then why do them? And if you say, Because God commands, then why would God command you do to do something that did not contribute to your salvation?
Well, why are salvific commands the only ones available to God? My understanding of Catholicism says that the minute after an honest confession, and after performing whatever penance, that a Catholic is in a state of salvation. If you died at that minute you would be saved. Now, at that same minute, does God still have commands for you, the failure to comply with NOT BEING a mortal sin? Of course He does. Yet, why would you do them if you are already in a saved state? Your salvation cannot be increased if you are already saved. You would follow His commands because obedience brings you closer to God, right? That is, even though your salvation is already assured at that minute. To obey is to show love for God, and that's what true Christians do without thought of whether it is toward our salvation or not. That's what we're saying.
It sounds to me like you are making an Orthodox argument for theosis. My understanding of that is that one never really thinks of himself as being in a "saved" state during life. Theosis comes at the end. But in my many battles with other Catholics on assurance, I have been told that a Catholic may be assured during the time in between the last confession and the next mortal sin. Is this incorrect?
HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!
There are those who attain, or at least we believe they attain, a state of theosis in life, but that is extremely rare. The Most Holy Theotokos springs to mind and some say +Symeon the New Theologian. And of course, not everyone by any means attains theosis at all. For the Orthodox, we never know if we are "saved" until the Final Judgment.
+Symeon the New Theologian taught:
"In the future life the Christian is not examined if he has renounced the whole world for Christ's love, or if he has distributed his riches to the poor or if he fasted or kept vigil or prayed, or if he wept and lamented for his sins, or if he has done any other good in this life, but he is examined attentively if he has any similitude with Christ, as a son does with his father."
Which is in accord with the writing of Abba Ammonas on Luke 6:30-36
"Love never hates anyone, never reproves anyone, never condemns anyone, never grieves anyone, never abhors anyone, neither faithful nor infidel nor stranger nor sinner nor fornicator, nor anyone impure, but instead it is precisely sinners, and weak and negligent souls that it loves more, and feels pain for them and grieves and laments, and it feels sympathy for the wicked and sinners, more than for the good, imitating Christ Who called sinners, and ate and drank with them. For this reason, showing what real love is, He taught saying, 'Become good and merciful like your Father in Heaven'...." Βιβλιοθήκη Ἐλλήνων Πατέρων, vol. 40, pp. 60-61.
Now this appears to me rather different from Western, be they Latin or Protestant, notions of how we are judged, in other words, what is the life's end state we are striving for so that we might spend an eternity with God. Nothing about the elect, at least not as explained by the West, nothing about a safety zone after confession or communion, just about our response to God's Love. A HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL MY CHRISTIAN BRETHREN!
No, man is not the purpose of God. That would make God exist for the sake of man. That would be a man-centered theology.
-A8
Until that question is answered, the original question [How do you now know with certainty that you are elect for glory?] remains unanswered.
-A8
Because God is love.
My understanding of Catholicism says that the minute after an honest confession, and after performing whatever penance, that a Catholic is in a state of salvation. If you died at that minute you would be saved. Now, at that same minute, does God still have commands for you, the failure to comply with NOT BEING a mortal sin? Of course He does. Yet, why would you do them if you are already in a saved state? Your salvation cannot be increased if you are already saved.
You are treating the concept "saved" as if it is entirely univocal. In one sense, we are "saved" when all our sins are forgiven; for then, should we die in that state, heaven will be our final destination. So merely being 'forgiven' is the minimal sense of salvation. But God's purpose for us is not merely that our sins be forgiven, but also that we become righteous, holy, sanctified, *perfect*. When we reach that state, then we are truly saved; then we can truly see God, and be perfectly happy in heaven with Him forever. So, even when all our sins are forgiven, our continued obedience to God's commands is a means by which God is sanctifying us, making us holy and righteous, and thereby "saving" us in the fuller sense of the word. I think this difference in understanding the word 'saved' and 'salvation' is part of the misunderstanding between Catholics and Protestants.
I have been told that a Catholic may be assured during the time in between the last confession and the next mortal sin. Is this incorrect?
No, as long as by "assured" you don't mean "knowing now with certainty that on the Day of Judgment I will be let into heaven."
-A8
Symbols are absolutely necessary but they have no power. The power is in the thing that is symbolized. The Old Testament sacrifices were symbols. They could not save anyone “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins”.(Heb 10:4). Perhaps hell is also a symbol.
Symbols *do* have power, or have you never been moved by the flag?
But the sacraments are not mere symbols; they actually effect what they symbolize.
-A8
Remember Harley's simple and straightforward question (to which your above applies):
Can you point FK and myself to some concise doctrinal writing that clearly defines the purpose of Holy Spirit from the Catholic perspective?
How can you honestly translate that into a created/uncreated issue about the existence of God? NOBODY around here on any side believes that any of the persons of God were created. Harley was simply reporting what he found on a popular Catholic website, that is often used as a source by Catholics on FR. We are asking you if you can further explain these findings.
"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." -- Romans 8:28
And as you continued, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. Great verses, Dr. E. The Lord always says it best. Of course God has a purpose vis-a-vis US. One question is, given that, what is the Catholic position of the Holy Spirit's purpose FOR us?
Of course salvation definitionally entails being drawn closer to Him. But so does sanctification, which is distinct, and is post-salvational. Catholics have described to me that salvation is a process in the sense that one is saved at Baptism, then loses salvation upon mortal sin, then is saved again, etc. Since one can never know how it ends up, it is a process. OTOH, we see it as a single, irrevocable event. We are drawn closer to Him for the purpose of salvation, at which time it is case closed on that issue, and then we are drawn still closer to him during the process of sanctification during the rest of our Christian lives.
Forest Keeper, this is an example of the internal contradiction in Reformed theology with respect to the sacraments. Salvation, in Reformed theology, apparently, has nothing to do with being united to God.
We follow two sacraments, the Lord's Supper and baptism. Both are in obedience to God and both are useful to our faiths. Being united to God in a greater and greater degree is very important to us. But SINCE we believe that salvation itself is a single event, that would be impossible if we could not grow outside of adding to our salvation.
If I defined "salvation" as the certitude, in fact, that a soul would go to heaven and be with God for eternity, would "salvation" be synonymous with theosis to that unqualified extent?
+Symeon the New Theologian taught:
"In the future life the Christian is not examined if he has renounced the whole world for Christ's love, or if he has distributed his riches to the poor or if he fasted or kept vigil or prayed, or if he wept and lamented for his sins, or if he has done any other good in this life, but he is examined attentively if he has any similitude with Christ, as a son does with his father."
I love these kinds of quotes. I can't find anything to disagree with. :)
...
Now this appears to me rather different from Western, be they Latin or Protestant, notions of how we are judged, in other words, what is the life's end state we are striving for so that we might spend an eternity with God. Nothing about the elect, at least not as explained by the West, nothing about a safety zone after confession or communion, just about our response to God's Love.
I agreed with +Symeon's quote because it eloquently trashed a works-based salvation model, and he reached the same ends as I would have, albeit by different means. -- We might disagree as to whether there is more than one type of "judgment", but as to salvational judgment I agree there must be a "similitude with Christ", if I interpret +Symeon's meaning correctly. Reformers believe that this similitude is promised by God in scripture and normally realized through sanctification unto the elect. We agree with you that we are all striving for this similitude during life and we say that this striving is due to the work of the Holy Spirit who indwells the elect.
No one must match my personal "description" of an elect to be among them. God's will is God's will and He has already elected those whom He has chosen. The Bible gives us, IMO, a very clear picture as to what an elect looks like. However, this cannot supersede the sovereignty of God to elect whomever He chooses outside of our fallible measurement of that picture.
Harley was simply reporting what he found on a popular Catholic website, that is often used as a source by Catholics on FR. We are asking you if you can further explain these findings.
Perhaps it would be helpful to clarify the question, and specify the website in question.
-A8
The Holy Spirit's "purpose" for us is the same as the Father and Son's purpose for us, namely, that we be united with Him in heaven forever.
-A8
-A8
And how does the Holy Spirit accomplish this?
"Leading the repentant man to undertake spiritual work, the Holy Spirit, Who called him to repentance, also grants him His comforts and teaches him not to turn back nor be attached to anything of this world. To this end, He opens the eyes of the soul and gives her to see the beauty of the purity reached through the works of repentance. In this way He kindles in it zeal for complete purification both of itself and of the body, that the two may be one in purity. For this is the aim of the teaching and guidance of the Holy Spirit - to purify them completely and bring them back to their original state, in which they were before the Fall, by destroying in them all adulterations introduced by the devil's envy, so that nothing of the enemy should remain therein. Then the body will become obedient to the dictates of the mind in all things, and the mind will masterfully determine its food and drink, its sleep and its every other action, constantly learning from the Holy Spirit to "keep under" the "body, and bring it into subjection" (I Corinthians 9:27) as did Apostle Paul." +Anthony the Great
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.