Argh. My point in writing the essay in the first place was not to defend either Arminian or Calvinist dogma, the Rush song that I threw in notwithstanding. My point was examining what the historical Church thought about the issue. The conclusion that I reached was that from the closing of the canon to the writings of Augustine, the Church generally held to a position acknowledging free will, whereas with Augustine under the influence of Paul, the Church adopted a more "Calvinist" posture, which gradually evolved into a system more or less friendly to free will again by the time of the Reformation and that Luther recovered Augustinian principles, but Calvin, with double predestination and the like, went much further than even the African Doctor. I am not trying to defend dogmas, I am merely attempting to explain what the historic position of the Church's first fifteen hundred years was. FWIW, I think it is a fairly silly excercise in attempting to apply our own feeble reason to the workings of the Infinite Mind.
Argh. My point in writing the essay in the first place was not to defend either Arminian or Calvinist dogma, the Rush song that I threw in notwithstanding. My point was examining what the historical Church thought about the issue. The conclusion that I reached was that from the closing of the canon to the writings of Augustine, the Church generally held to a position acknowledging free will, whereas with Augustine under the influence of Paul, the Church adopted a more "Calvinist" posture, which gradually evolved into a system more or less friendly to free will again by the time of the Reformation and that Luther recovered Augustinian principles, but Calvin, with double predestination and the like, went much further than even the African Doctor. I am not trying to defend dogmas, I am merely attempting to explain what the historic position of the Church's first fifteen hundred years was.Yo, homey: I know what you are attempting to do.
Trouble is, you really haven't addressed Augustine's treatment of Matthew 11:20-27.
And it is fundamental. Your claims that Calvin and Luther "went much further" than Augustine are groundless. Such is the normal Roman claim, I'll admit; but that doesn't change the fact that it is a ridiculous claim. Augustine's writings on the doctrine of Reprobation, the Predestination of the Damned (so called "double" predestination), were if anything considerably stronger than Luther's or yes, even Calvin's. And the reason you don't know that, is because you aren't familiar with Augustine's treatment of Matthew 11:20-27.
Maybe you shouldn't dismiss my reading of your essay so swiftly. I realize that you are trying only to air your claims regarding the authority of the Patristics. But understand that orthodox Protestants do know our Patristics. And I am telling you that your understanding of the Patristics is wrong.
FWIW, I think it is a fairly silly excercise in attempting to apply our own feeble reason to the workings of the Infinite Mind.
FWIW, I think it is a fairly silly exercise to claim that you cannot attribute certain facts of Foreknowledge to God which He expressly claims to know!! No one is asking you to "reason out the workings of the Infinite Mind". We are, however, asking you to acknowledge those Facts of which God (in the Person of the Incarnate Christ) expressly declares his own knowledge. And the reason you are unwilling to attribute to God specific Facts of Foreknowledge which He attributes quite specifically to himself, is because you really are Semi-Pelagian, and you really do understand that this passage annihilates your position... just as Augustine knew it annihilated the Pelagians.
Do NOT deny to God Foreknowledge which He specifically claims unto Himself. Let's try this again:
Scripture
Matthew 11: 20 - 27 --
Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you. At that time Jesus said, I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.Question
- God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice NOT TO REPENT in the case of His non-performance of Miracles equivalent to those performed in Chorazin and Bethsaida; AND
- God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice TO REPENT in the case of His performance of such Miracles; AND
- God CHOSE not to perform these Miracles in Tyre and Sidon, a choice which had as its perfectly foreknown result the NON-Repentance of Tyre and Sidon, just as He foreknew.
True, or False?
No one is asking you to "reason out" the workings of God's Mind in this; only to acknowledge as fact that Foreknowledge which He claims unto himself.
I'll await your response.