Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
I would simply suggest your perception as well as your authors is tainted by your bias for your Church. If one is to read the writings objectively one would understand the arguments. It has been my experience that it’s often a mistake to rely on authors telling me what others have stated.
I started with Augustine when I heard there was a theocentric view. The statistical odds are too great that Calvin, Luther and I (as well as many great preachers throughout the centuries) could all come up with the same interpretation and look at the passages in exactly the same way. Besides, Calvin and Luther were equally adept in Greek and Hebrew. I'm confident they read Augustine in his original language just as your authors did but arrived at a completely different conclusion.
BTW-Alister McGrath is a member of the Church of England. Why would I think that he would be qualified to say that Calvin and Luther misread Augustine? Heck, I don't think half the Presbyterians and Lutherans understand the theocentric roots of their denominations and if they did they would probably deny it. There aren't many difference between Catholics, Protestants or Orthodox anymore.
And such is it with being Born Again.
The wind blows where it wants to, and you hear its sound, but don't know where it comes from and where it is going. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit." John 3:8
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Cr 2:14
Men do indeed have free will, but they will never seek God or desire him with that depraved will.
The free will of Adam was lost in the fall. Adam (and us though him) lost one set of choice options.
Jer 4:22 For my people [is] foolish, they have not known me; they [are] sottish children, and they have none understanding: they [are] wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.
Why? It is because a spiritually dead man cannot freely choose spiritual life. He needs spiritual CPR
NO We need a whole heart transplant
Eze 11:19 And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:
THEN the free will that God gave to Adam is restored.
Go and read Genesis 3 (the account of the fall) See what happened to the relationship between God the father and Adam after the fall
God was seeking Adam.Adam was not seeking God
Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they [were] naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
Gen 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where [art] thou? Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I [was] naked; and I hid myself.
That is the natural response of man to God since the fall
Man tries to make his own solution and covering, He does not seek out God
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
They thought they could save themselves.they had the solution they liked.
But it was not Gods solution, not one of their choice. They were now totally dependant on their "free will " , their dominion was gone. They hide and covered they did not seek and find .
THAT is the condition of carnal unregenerate man.
He can make choices. But he will never choose God. He will make insufficient choices that do not please God nor cover their nakedness
Unregenerate man will choose the lesser of two evils. BUT until he has that heart transplant he will never choose Gods solution
Most of us have been raised to worship at the altar of free will and choices
The fact is that all choices are made within a restricted set of circumstances
A man jumping off the empire state building can not exercise free will half way down.
Did you chose your sex? Did your chose your parents? Did you choose your country or city of birth? Did you chose your intelligence?
All of these things were predestined by your creator
He set up for you that parameters of the decisions and choices that will be available to you.
He could have had you born in India to Hindu parents in a low class. You never would have had an opportunity to go to school or to make the life choices you make today. You may never have heard the gospel to be saved.
Acts 17 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.
All of our choices are governed by our preferences. Our preferences are part of that same creative process of the Father
Have you read the twin studies?
I read one that blew me away
Two brothers separated at birth. both had the same IQ, Both the same level of education, both loved firefighting (one was a professional and one a volunteer), both married women similar in appearance and both wives were named Jean. Both men had the same number of kids...and both drove red cars
Now these studies are done to show us the effects of genetics.
I know the designer of genetics. And His name is Lord of Lords and King of Kings. He is the great "I AM"
God has designed each of us in such a way that we will have preferences that will lead us to certain choices.
Because of the fall men will never seek God
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
In order for man to choose Christ he must have a preference for Christ. But the fall removed that preference. Man is spiritually dead.He can not choose life
Jhn 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Note here that Jesus says a man cannot SEE the kingdom of God. Man can not desire or choose what he can not see
So God gives those that are His a New heart
Eze 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
God then gives us a heart that will desire Him.. A heart that can see Him and choose Him...
Our will was put in bondage in Eden. The will we have is the will of Adam. Only the new birth gives us a truly free will. The desire and the will to choose Christ
I find it so interesting that people resent the idea that God has foreordained our eternity. If our father so loved us to foreordain our present, how much more important is our eternity?
LOL. I'm subjective in my reading and you are not? Bradwardine, Luther and Calvin were the first in a thousand years to get it right?
Last time I checked McGrath is an Evangelical C of E person. If you knew anything about Church history, Harley, you'd know that Evangelical C of E's come from the Calvinist side of the ledger.
And finally but most importantly, once more you did the HarleyD sidestep. Augustine states explicitly that he believes in free will in a letter written shortly before he died to clarify arguments over what he meant.
Now pay close attention, Harley. What I wrote in my preceding post is not a matter of subjective interpretation. It is not a case of he said/she said. Those of us who believe in free will have Augustine's explicit statement supporting our case. In order to interpret him in the opposite way, you and Luther and Calvin have to find an alternative interpretation to his explicit words. Of course anyone can explain away someone's explicit words. I'm not saying that you can't mount an argument for Augustine's having denied free will.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT THOSE WHO MOUNT SUCH AN ARGUMENT, WHETHER LUTHER OR CALVIN OR HARLEYD ARE THE ONES WHO HAVE THE HEAVIER BURDEN OF PROOF. To tell me that I'm arbitrarily misinterpreting Augustine and you are objectively interpreting him is a crock.
And, dear, dear Harley, do you really want to employ this postmodern lateral move and explain your opponent's view as subjective interpretation? Don't you get it, Harley: when you make that move, you simultaneously undermine your own claim. If I'm subjective, so are you. At that point, there can be no further conversation.
No, I think that arguments can be made for common and specific meanings of words, that one can use principles of reason to interpret Augustine's words, principles that are accepted by those in possession of reason and intelligence and decent knowledge of languages. When someone disputes my reading of Augustine, I don't tell him he's just subjective. He can then reply to me, so's your old man.
No, I gave reasons why the free-will reading of Augustine is the most persuasive reading. You have no reply except to label it biased.
And we've been round and round on this point before, Harley. Don't you ever get embarrassed by trotting out the same old tired non-arguments? Don't you ever get tired of sidestepping?
When you are ready to mount a genuine argument as to why Augustine's 426 letter explicitly defending free will does not mean that he explicitly defended free will, let me know. Save the "subjective bias" argument for the Dimwits in Congress.
Yes the wind blows and you bloviate. This is no response to my arguments. You throw a pile of verses at the wall hoping some will stick. When you are ready to address the argument I made, I'll respond to yours. Until then, quote your verses at yourself.
If we believe that works are NECESSARY for salvation then they are not works for God they are self serving, seeking to save ourselves in eternity. They are for our eternal good not Gods glory.
Last I looked love is a FRUIT of the Holy Spirit, so it is something the unsaved can not have . They may have a carnal human substitute, but it is not divine love indwelling them. So their work come from self love, carnal self seeking love not ordained by God for HIS glory .
Jesus taught this pretty clearly
Mat 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mat 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Here are men that believe their good works , done in the name of the Lord, works will save them. But Jesus called those very works SIN, He then consigned them to hell. He tells them not that they were once saved and lost their salvation, He tells them "I NEVER knew you". So all the time these men were working it was self serving, driven by carnal love or ego, not coming from the ordination of God or the work of the Holy Spirit in them. That is why Christ called it sin, when men may have applauded it.
Think of the analogy of good works being called "fruit". The tree does not give like to the fruit. The only fruit that is not rotten is that fruit that is attached to the life giving tree.
It may not choose what fruit it will be, it must be what the tree tells it to be.
Actually if you read it you would know it was my response to your post, that I only used the verses to show why I believed as I did. They were placed there to explain my thought as my thoughts are not worth a thing but Gods are
I never quote verses to myself :)
Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it.
So someone will read them and they will understand in their heart as God so ordains. I never worry about those that choose not to read or do not understand them, that is Gods job!
Have a Good day!
BTW I agreed that men have free will ... if you had read it you would have known that :)
With all due respect, I don't think so. Jesus, and Jesus alone, is responsible for my salvation.
The Holy Spirit will blow whereever He wills. If you had ever read the book of Numbers, you would have learned the lesson that He also falls on those outside the camp.
Lutherans believe and teach that God in His infinite love did not abandon men in their doom but resolved to save them through the sacrifice of His only Son; that the Gospel is the special revelation in which God offers to all men forgiveness of sins and salvation through Jesus Christ; and that those who penitently embrace this Gospel of reconciliation through Christ are declared righteous before God and saved - not through their own merit, but for Christ’s sake, by grace and through faith. References: John 3: 16-17; 1 Timothy 2: 4; Romans 3: 22-24, 28; Ephesians 2: 8-10.
The question is whether this will of man is bound by original sin-so bound that it is impossible for him to squeak for help. You and others would say that God turns the light beam on and *pop* man is capable of making a decision. Luther, Calvin, Augustine and I would say that man is bound to sin and God releases us from that bondage of sin. The Son must set us free and you must be born again-two recurring themes. Only after the Son has set us free can we exercise our wills to do right or wrong. But if we do wrong the Lord chastises us and brings us back. He doesn't leave us to drive off a cliff. You are either a "slave to sin" or a "slave to righteousness" (Rom 6)
Man's will while it is free is tied to the path God establishes just like Jonah heading to Nineveh via Tarshish.
It appears that only the heretics know any verses. Perhaps you should pay attention, you might learn something.
Men's thoughts are a dime a dozen, every man has at least one opinion on every topic, and most of them are pretty worthless. But God is after all the final authority, so I am always sad when someone might think MY thoughts have any merit on their own, they only have merit in so far as they reflect God's words and thoughts.
1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
I go away for a day and come back to read a quote like this. Astounding. Even more so when you think about it and most Catholicism is nothing but mysticism, lol. These people know not what it is they worship (to quote some sage or other).
Listen fella, we know just as many verses as you do. We are tired of your claim that you alone know the Bible. It's insulting and nauseating that your side repeats it again and again and again and again.
Plus, you would think he would be happy and blesed to hear the Word, no matter the circumstances. Well, I am, thank you for them all.
Sadly there isn't much evidence of it. Maybe you can quote the biblical verses that say preaching in silence and preaching to the animals, is a correct way to spread the Gospel, lol.
While you're at it, quote the bible verses that say those who are diligent to study the Word and who rely on Christ alone for their salvation, are heretics.
Typical sidestep, again, Harley. You simply evade my point.
I know very well that McGrath is not your brand of Calvinist. But you did not state that only non-Arminian Calvinists meet your scrutiny. You dismissed his work as irrelevant because he's C of E. (Typical cheap shot--when you have no case you try an ad hominem, accuse someone of bias.) You didn't say he was no good because he's an Arminian. He's a C of E evangelical Protestant. He's not a Catholic. To you anyone whose not a puppet-God Calvinist is wrong. Fine--your pre-judice is showing.
And spare me the claim that you believe in free will but the free will you believe in is unfree. We believe the will (orientation, voluntas) is bound to sin but consent/choice (arbitrium) remains free. Choice/consent needs a freed up will (voluntas) in order to choose God but, having had its companion, formerly bound, will (voluntas) freed, choice/arbitrium/consent acts freely. What you call "free will" is a phantom, given the way you explain the functioning of choice and the meaning of "boundness." It boils down to whether we can refuse God and again and again you've said no. So YOU DO NOT IN FACT BELIEVE IN FREE WILL and you insult my intelligence by trying this dodge on me. The "free will" you believe in, in fact, is not free ever to choose against God and when it chooses God you believe that in fact God moves it like a puppeteer moves the strings on a marionette. So your lip service to free will is just that: mere words, denied by the rest of your doctrine.
We've been round and round on this. Keep up the sidestep dance, my friend.
All the essential points have been made many times over; you have no response to a single substantive argument I or other Catholic and Orthodox posters have made. You constantly shadowbox with straw men.
But why do I even try to point this out? You seem incapable even of understanding what people write, much less what yourself write, having repeatedly refuted yourself in your own questions and statements.
It's been fun Harley.
You really need to work on your people skills.
Chow.
I wonder how some of these comments are going to sound on judgment day?
I believe you meant to write .... ciao.
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.