Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
I must disagree. satan's efforts certainly lead to evil in our world. We are fooled all the time into making bad decisions [FK]
FK, the only difference between us and animals is that we have reason. Reason is the only source of free will because it is capable of acting in concert or against our needs.
Without reason, your decisions are made by necessity (of your nature). Animals do not know God and do no sin (willingly against him). Intelligent creatures (angels, demons, humans) all know God, and it is through this knowledge that sin becomes possible: when we act, by virtue of our reason, against God.
If Eve made an informed free will choice to disobey God, then why did Adam get all the blame?
Because in the Bible "man is the head of a woman" and he takes the blame, and the credit. But, we don't act or agree or do what's in the Bible nowadays, do we? For instance, there are few women in Churches whose heads are covered, and that is decreed in the New Testament. And Protestants have women "bishops" whereas the NT says that a bishop (always referred to as a male) shall be a "husband of one wife..." etc.
Gos specifically told Adam not to eat of the tree, and it was Adam's responsibility to make sure Eve knew that as well. But she was "given" to Adam and therefore Adam is portrayed as someone who carried the responsibility for both of them. She could say "I was fooled," but Adam listened to her, someone who was supposed to listen to him, and that was his downfall: he was irresponsible in addition to being arrogant and proud.
We are born with a sin nature, through Adam
I hear this over and over and wonder what that means. We are born spiritually separated from God. God gave us body and soul. Bodies have needs. Our needs are not in themselves sinful but how we go about satisfying them that is -- our intent and direction. We can't change our body, but we can restrain it with our mind, our intellect, our reason. Some do, and some don't. No matter how you turn it, it's always your intellect that makes a difference whether you sin or not.
No manner of intellect is enough to freely choose God on our own
God gave us intellect to make choices, FK. If He didn't want us to use it to edify or mortify ourselves with it, he would have left us without it. It's not man-centered anything: it's being what God made us, body and soul.
I think you are confusing intellect with being intellectual, educated. Nonsense. We all know God's laws because they are inscribed in our hearts; we are all subject to God's laws, because by our reason we know good from evil. By knowing what is not good and choosing evil we commit sin.
You imply that we think God forces us to sin. None of this is correct
Yet God is in full control and ordains our steps? Did God not 'set up' the whole scenario in the Garden of Eden so that Adam would fall, as Harley D implies? What do you call that, FK?
IIRC, you do not believe in the sin nature of man, but the Catholics and the rest of us do
Our nature is corrupted with our will. We have a propensity to sin because our will is not always in harmony with the will of God. In fact, it almost never is! By we are the authors of our decisions, knowing good from evil, and therefore of evil, on a daily basis.
You won't distinguish between free will to do good in God's eyes, and free will to do evil
Oh, I do make that distinction very much so! We know what is good and what is evil; God made sure we do by inscribing His laws in our hearts, by revealing Himself to man. We choose evil not because its evil, but because it seems good. We convince ourselves that it is good or good enough. Just as Eve "saw that the fruit was good to eat." We make tose decisions daily, FK, when we jump from one lane going 90 mph to another in between cars and barely miss a collision. As you watch people do things you ask yourself "what were they thinking?" Surely they know better. but they choose to do the wrong thing because when people make decisions they don't ask "is this what God would want me to do?"
That kind of rationalisation scares me FK. You need to guard against such self deception. There have been numerous exmaples of people committing crimes and saying "God told me to do it." What you said above is probably what Eve was thinking as she bit into that fruit.
"Real" faith? Does the Scripture define the difference between "real" faith and "unreal" faith? If I was to broaden my definition of faith to include love, hope, repentance, conversion, and perseverance - well, then I guess I am saved by "faith" alone. However, faith does not include all of these other attributes. They are distinguished from each other in Scripture! Thus, we are NOT saved by faith ALONE. We are saved with combinations of all of the above.
"What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?" James 2:14
"if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." 1 Cor 13:2
As you can see, a faith that lacks works of love is pointless. Notice how the Bible DISTINGUISHES between faith and love. One CAN have faith, "real" faith, without love. REAL faith to move mountains! Does it get anymore real than that??? However, this is not a question of "real" faith, but adding love (from God) to our faith (from God). James and Paul agree, but defining the opposing sides of the same coin.
Faith without works is dead. James.
Works without faith is dead. Paul.
If you don't have faith AND works (of love), then you are dead. Thus, faith ALONE, without love, doesn't save anyone.
Regards
"Does God knock on everyone's heart equally, since God loves everyone? If so, then whose intellect would choose hell over heaven?"
The Fathers certainly tell us that God does exactly this, with the possible exception of a remark or two from +Augustine which are outside the consensus patrum.
+Anthony the Great in the 3rd century AD wrote:
"He is good, and He only bestows blessings and never does harm, remaining always the same. We men, on the other hand, if we remain good through resembling God, are united to Him, but if we become evil through not resembling God, we are separated from Him. By living in holiness we cleave to God; but by becoming wicked we make Him our enemy. It is not that He grows angry with us in an arbitrary way, but it is our own sins that prevent God from shining within us and expose us to demons who torture us. And if through prayer and acts of compassion we gain release from our sins, this does not mean that we have won God over and made Him to change, but that through our actions and our turning to the Divinity, we have cured our wickedness and so once more have enjoyment of God's goodness. Thus to say that God turns away from the wicked is like saying that the sun hides itself from the blind."
+John Chrysostomos taught:
"It is not God who is hostile, but we; for God is never hostile."
We are free to accept or reject God's grace yet without that grace we can do absolutely nothing to effect our theosis. Thus, without limiting the power of The Spirit to go wither it will, we believe that the uncreated energies of God which we receive at baptism enable, but do not require, us to respond to God's grace and live in accordance with His commandments and thus become further strengthened and more like God by grace. As +Symeon the New Theologian says:
"The roof of any house stands upon the foundations and the rest of the structure. The foundations themselves are laid in order to carry the roof. This is both useful and necessary, for the roof cannot stand without the foundations and the foundations are absolutely useless without the roof - no help to any living creature. In the same way the grace of God is preserved by the practice of the commandments, and the observance of these commandments is laid down like foundations through the gift of God. The grace of the Spirit cannot remain with us without the practice of the commandments, but the practice of the commandments is of no help or advantage to us without the grace of God."
This grace is with us from the beginning of our existence:
"For truly the assistance which God gives to our nature is provided to those who correctly live the life of virtue. This assistance was already there at our birth, but it is manifested and made known whenever we apply ourselves to diligent training in the higher life and strip ourselves for the more vigorous contests." +Gregory of Nyssa
You ask why anyone would reject this grace and since people clearly do, the teachings of the Fathers must be nonsense. The fact is, FK, that people don't "choose" hell; they choose to reject God because becoming like God is difficult. It requires that we reject our nature. The Evil One is a great liar who tells us that God, because He is all merciful and loving, will ignore our choices to reject Him and that those choices will have no consequences. But when we come to the end of our earthly lives and find that we have cut ourselves off from God and have no hope, when we find ourselves tormented by the same love which surrounds others who made other choices to cleave to God, the Evil One reminds us that God's "justice" is inexorable.
Both were to blame, not just Adam. You are incorrect to say that HE got all of thet blame...
For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 1 Tim 2:13-14
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 2 Cor 11:3
The only reason why Paul mentions Adam in Romans 5 as being responsible for sin is that he is representative of mankind, being the prototype. In the first creation, we take on the attributes of this first man - esp. his propensity to sin. When made a new creation through the second man, Jesus, we take on HIS nature, the propensity towards holiness - as now, we have within us a new Spirit. Paul, in 1 Cor 15 and Rom 5 makes this comparison - not to exclude Eve from her part in the first sin, but because Paul is making an comparison and drawing out the effect that being in Christ means. Just as we are like Adam, we will be like Christ
The first man [is] of the earth, earthy: the second man [is] the Lord from heaven. As [is] the earthy, such [are] they also that are earthy: and as [is] the heavenly, such [are] they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. 1 Cor 15:47-49
There is no need to mention Eve for Paul to make his point. What IS interesting is that less than 100 years later, people ARE making connections between Mary and Eve.
Generally speaking, we act according to our nature. IIRC, you do not believe in the sin nature of man, but the Catholics and the rest of us do.
Catholics don't believe that man has a "sinful" nature. We have a PROPENSITY to sin as a result of concupiscience. IF our nature was evil, then Jesus Christ did NOT take up our nature during the incarnation. The POTENTIAL exists for man to be sinless, in Christ (as Mary has shown). It is NOT our nature to sin - God created us GOOD. As a result of the Fall, we were wounded without the ability to reclaim that lost sanctifying grace on our own. That much we agree. But we disagree on anthropology.
Our intellect, as opposed to our nature, to choose to sin comes into play after salvation, for sin happens, even though we have a regenerated heart, and God is not the author of evil
Our intellect and will come into play in choosing evil, regardless of whether we are regenerated or not. Paul makes his case in Romans 7 - that even AFTER this regeneration, he continues to sin, he continues to battle the FLESH - which does NOT stop tempting us. We do not lose concupiscience AFTER Baptism. This is why sanctification is a necessary part of the salvation formula. Baptism is merely one step in the process of our divinization.
Does God knock on everyone's heart equally, since God loves everyone? If so, then whose intellect would choose hell over heaven? It doesn't make sense.
God does NOT knock on everyone's heart "equally", although He knocks on everyone's heart "sufficiently". I have already explained why someone would choose "hell" over "heaven". The afterlife requires faith. It is something not seen yet. Thus, someone CAN make the choice to turn from God, and do one's own will - without consideration of afterlife consequences (because that person does not believe in the afterlife). No one is choosing "hell". They either don't take it seriously or don't believe in its existence.
Doesn't God bless some more than others with intellect? Is this God's love for all?
Intellect is not required to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Directing one's will to God's Will is required. The intellect guides the will, the desire to do the good. But one does not have to be "intelligent" to know and interpret that Law written on their hearts. People, even the incredibly simple, know about justice, mercy, compassion, love, and contrition, even if they cannot define them.
God does not cause us to do evil, although He remains in control of all things.
I don't see the distinction you make. It would be better to say "God allows evil for HIS own purposes. God does not cause evil". Thus, MAN is the operating agent and cause of evil. Would this be agreeable to your point of view? Classic Calvinism would say that God inevitably ALSO causes evil and actively reprobates men to hell. It is at this point where we would part company.
Regards
I respectfully disagree. How does the child making a cookie intrude on her mother's "sovereignty"?
I would respectfully suggest you are comparing apples and oranges. Only God has His level of sovereignty, which is absolute over all manner of existence. The mother is only "sovereign" in that she is running the cookie operation from beginning to end. The daughter does nothing without the mother's allowance. The child forms some cookie dough, and I paint the kitchen. No big deal, others are still watchful of every step and are in complete control.
But to go outside of the mother's sovereignty, suppose there was a scream from outside and the mother had to rush out to see what was the matter. Then, suppose the daughter decided to fill up a new sheet of cookie dough, open the hot oven all by herself, and slip in the sheet. Of course, since she doesn't understand the timing element of it, she waits an arbitrary amount of time and then tries to take the hot cookie sheet out of the oven.
The mother then walks in. Very loosely speaking, under your view, the mother would thank her daughter for the cooperation that she gave in the mother's absence. Under my view, the daughter would be in huge trouble and not allowed to participate in cookie making for some time. You decide which is love.
God is in total control. There is no luck. You are again placing God into time when He "decides". His decisions are based on what He "sees" all at once. His "vision" includes EVERYTHING WE DO!
I see your answer as a contradiction. How can God be in "total control" if His decisions are based on anything other than His will? You say His decisions are based on what He foresees. If God really was in control, He would not even bother to foresee anything, He would just will "whatever" to happen, through means consistent with His nature. You are again erasing the issue out of existence by saying everything is simultaneous, or God is outside of time, THEREFORE EVERYTHING IS A MYSTERY. Your argument has never supported an actual position, it just defends the assertion that there can be no position.
Since God has such "vision", why is it a problem for God to act based on our responses that He foresees outside of time before they even take place?
There, you even made it easier for me. It's a problem because you make God DEPENDENT upon us and our decisions. You just said it, and I must disagree. God is sovereign, not dependent upon man.
God gives EVERYONE sufficient grace to be saved. He died for the sins of ALL men, not just those YOU choose or say. The problem is that men do not listen to that natural law placed in their hearts.
God created man, God gives everyone sufficient grace, only a very few are ever really saved. Did God do a lousy job? Didn't God already issue a total recall of the model once (except for 8)? Are you saying He couldn't get it right the second time either? Again, if God creates all of us and gives all of us sufficient grace, how do so few choose Him and so many choose against? I assume you're not going to tell me it's luck. :)
Saying my statement, "God ordains things and man carries them out." is not necessarily "incorrect" is like saying someone is not necessarily pregnant. It's either correct or it's not correct. Either I'm absolutely correct or I'm a heretic.
You may feel this is a "crude statement" and denies free will but facts are facts. I can't help it. I don't make the rules. If you feel the true mechanism of "ordaining" and "carrying out" by God is through the "free will of man", then you really don't believe in ANY intervention of God throughout history. By your definition God does everything through man. Consequently there is no reason to pray for anyone or about anything because it is up to us. Nothing in the Old Testament happened except by God allowing men to run the show. Moses wrote the 10 commandments, Joshua felt it was the right time to go into the Promise Land, Solomon acted on his own to build the temple, on and on and on. "If it is to be, then it's up to me." This is the conclusion of Open Theists and is exactly where this philosophical road mistakenly leads.
It states that "For by grace you are saved, THROUGH FAITH,...". We rest in the promises of God. Any works that we do for the kingdom is Christ working in us.
I'm reminded of Ai (Joshua 7). The children of Israel were commanded by God to go in and take possession of the Promise Land. They refused and God told them forget it then. Instead of heeding God's command not to go they "repented" and decided to attack Ai for "the Lord" much to their demise. They did not have the Lord fighting for them. This only illustrates the point that we can do NOTHING without the Lord's blessing.
I have heard you every time you have said we can do nothing without God. And, I have also heard you when you contradict yourself with the next thought, that man determines his own salvation by making a free will decision to accept Christ, without God's "interference". Your version of "free will" has always meant "separate from God", or "independent of God". Otherwise, you would say it is not truly free will. Am I wrong?
Yes, you say that God nudges, and He helps, and He guides, but the bottom line decision, the MONEY DECISION, is always on us alone. Free will means you can reject help and guidance, so it really is only on you. THAT is a man-centered theology.
Yes, a pity you so constrict God's sovereignty and ability to communicate through other means than a 2000 year old book.
As I find it a pity that you find the Bible so inadequate that it must be supplemented by the words of popular men.
FK: "The assurance comes strictly from the Bible."
You are misinterpreting the Bible. God's promises are for those who persevere until the end. How have you missed this theme in Scriptures?
Those who persevere are unknown to any human, according to you. God's promises are only for them. How do you not see that THEREFORE, God's promises are of no value to any particular person because no one can know if they apply to him?
"It" spoke to them [the missionaries who fell away], as well...You keep ignoring this, don't you? This theology is misleading many Christians into a false sense of security, one that God is not offering.
I have no idea what (who) spoke to those missionaries originally. Isn't it ironic that you are the one who presumes to know? :)
FK: "The author is obviously talking about salvational "safety"
What does Paul say about that in 1 Cor 10:12?
He says we should never take our salvation for granted, and he was right. To take it for granted would be to cheapen it, and that's wrong. That's different from assurance, in which we have positive confidence in God's promises and we are grateful to Him for them and we seek to obey. Somewhere in heaven I imagine a scale of how many and what kind of sins each of the elect commit after salvation. Those who don't follow your verse very closely will do worse, and those who really follow it will do much better, and be rewarded. All will be in heaven.
Christ's mission on the cross is done. He has earned the remission of the sin of all men, just as Adam earned the lose of sanctifying grace of all men. But His mission to mankind is not done!
NO NO NO! I can't let you get away with that. :) You said Adam cost all of us sanctifying grace, meaning we are all lost when born. I would loosely agree with the principle. :) But then you said that Christ completed His mission by earning the remission of the sin of all mankind. Does that mean He earned it and is keeping it in His pocket until we do something to earn it for ourselves? That doesn't match what you have said before, and it doesn't sound complete at all.
Adam completed our downfall, but according to you, Christ did nothing of the sort in opposite. Christ only bought us a lottery ticket, for a "chance". I just think Christ is much more powerful than this. You appear to be making Adam more powerful that Christ.
We call this "secondary cause". Thus, the mother is sovereign and free - understanding that God has given us everything that we have to make our decisions.
suppose the daughter decided to fill up a new sheet of cookie dough, open the hot oven all by herself, and slip in the sheet. Of course, since she doesn't understand the timing element of it, she waits an arbitrary amount of time and then tries to take the hot cookie sheet out of the oven. The mother then walks in. Very loosely speaking, under your view, the mother would thank her daughter for the cooperation that she gave in the mother's absence. Under my view, the daughter would be in huge trouble and not allowed to participate in cookie making for some time. You decide which is love.
It doesn't work that way. We do NOTHING without God, thus, He doesn't "leave the room", come back, and then we make the claim that we cooperated with the mother making cookies. I cannot stress this enough: We don't work in "shifts" with God - where I work one hour BY MYSELF, and He works the rest of the day - or any such allocation of time. ALL we do is under God's care and auspice. Just the same, since WE choose to do His will (with the supplies that He has given us - cookie dough, etc.), we are attributed with righteousness by cooperating with God's Will. Men do not have to cooperate with God's Will. Thus, we are rewarded for this turning to the Lord.
I see your answer as a contradiction. How can God be in "total control" if His decisions are based on anything other than His will?
Have you ever considered that it is God's Will to give us free will? Isn't it clear that God allows man to choose, sometimes AGAINST God's Will? God ALLOWS evil. He brings good out of it, despite our actions. Thus, He is in control of the final outcome.
You are again erasing the issue out of existence by saying everything is simultaneous, or God is outside of time, THEREFORE EVERYTHING IS A MYSTERY.
I disagree with your prognosis of my point of view. Again, I am sorry you fail to understand what "eternity" means.
you make God DEPENDENT upon us and our decisions. You just said it, and I must disagree. God is sovereign, not dependent upon man.
you can't seem to keep from placing God on a time line, can you? What more can I say? God does not exist on a time line, thus, His decisions are not made in the year 1 or 1900 when looking at you and whether to elect us. His decisions encompass both His Will and our response, which He sees from outside of the timeline.
Regards
There are a number of Scriptural verses that support free choice. See my tagline, for example.
Free will, as the Arminian defines it, is not scriptural and not supported with scripture.
No one here is defining free will as the Arminian defines it.
As much as we would like to think so, the clay cannot tell the potter what kind of pot he wants to become.
God, since He sees into ALL time, can see our response to His graces. Thus, He is able to take our free will decision into account when forming us. God is not subject to time. God doesn't wake up one day, think about making a HarleyD in 4000 BC, then waits, then makes you, whether of the elect or not, without seeing what you will become.
Either I'm absolutely correct or I'm a heretic.
It depends on what you mean by "ordain" and to what respect God ordains things. I don't think a non-Calvinist would say God ordains evil - that would make Him responsible for evil. Has any Christian ever said that before the heretic Calvin came along?
Nothing in the Old Testament happened except by God allowing men to run the show.
Agreed. But there is a difference between "allowing" and "actively forcing" someone to do something. God, for His own reasons, allows evil. He brings goodness out of man's misguided decisions. Again, I ask you to beware of looking at "God ordaining evil" only from the OT.
Regards
Your original statement was:
By denying the literal, intended sense of Jesus' Words, you do injustice to the passage.
My opinion is that Catholicism infrequently takes the literal meaning of a verse, or the common sense meaning of a verse (or passage). You have consistently held that the intended sense of Jesus' words is something completely different from the words themselves. It is a secret code, only decipherable by the Catholic hierarchy. :) The Bible doesn't say what it says, it in fact says something completely different, all the way up to being in the opposite. My comment was in light of all this, that it is funny that you should accuse me of doing an injustice to the passage, when your meaning of so many passages is so unjust to the words of those passages, of course, in my opinion.
You are correct, that is the position of the CHURCH. However, some Protestants do not consider Jesus' view on salvation, but a twisted version of Paul and salvation by faith alone. They repeatedly quote from Romans and Galatians, while ignoring the Gospels (such as Matthew 5:20 vs. ANY idea of Christ "covering" us with HIS righteousness.)
It states that "For by grace you are saved, THROUGH FAITH,...". We rest in the promises of God. Any works that we do for the kingdom is Christ working in us.
Brother, are you saying that faith comes from us? Any work is Christ working through us! ANY! INCLUDING FAITH! Thus, it is ridiculous to say that we are saved by faith alone - as if it comes from us - while love or repentence has nothing to do with salvation.
This only illustrates the point that we can do NOTHING without the Lord's blessing.
I hope that in these many posts, I have made it clear that I agree with you on this - whether God allows us to do evil or imbues within us the desire to do good.
I suppose one man's heretic is another man's church father. BTW-What happened to "tradition". Not many of the early Church fathers are still around last I counted
I never made the statement to "consult St. Irenaeus if you want to know my beliefs". This become even a bigger waste of time (consulting Calvin) because you yourself admit you do not agree with everything Calvin says! How am I to know Harley by reading Calvin?
I just saying that I must answer to God for my beliefs. I won't be able to point to Pope Leo and Pope John Paul and say, "This is what he told me to be true."
But you do! This is the funny part. YOU consider the Bible is the Word of God, based on the witness of the Catholic Church. YOU consider that God is a Trinity of persons, based on the Catholic Church. YOU consider that Jesus Christ has TWO wills, not one, based on the Catholic Church. And so forth. Thus, your foundation of faith is built on the rock of Peter and the successors of the Apostles. Leaving this solid foundation only leads to building on sand.
He commands us to pray for knowledge, wisdom and understanding. It is up to us to be lead by His guidance. This doesn't make me infallible but it is the way God wants us to behave. We are to rely upon Him.
So would GOD give you guidance that disagrees with the Church He established and confirmed during Pentecost? Didn't Jesus say something about a Kingdom that acts against itself is bound to fall? Even if you do not believe that the Catholic Church was the end result of Christ's work of establishing a Church, why would the "spirit" come to men and whisper contradictory words into your ears (such as the Calvin-Arminian feud)?
Regards
you are interpreting the Catholic view incorrectly. Back to our mother/daughter and the cookies. Is the mother forcing her daughter to make cookies? It is her will that the daughter do a loving activity with the mother. You would have the mother grab the child by the hand forcibly, hanking her unwillingly to the table and stuff the cookie dough into her hand. NOW MAKE THOSE COOKIES NOW!!! Man doesn't "determine" his own salvation. God judges man based on his response - by GOD'S STANDARDS, not man's. Read the Beatitudes if you want to know God's standards of obeying His will. My "version" of free will NEVER removes God from the picture!!! This is totally ridiculous and a terrible injustice to my position, as I have time and again said that God comes to us to aid us in ANY good deed to move our will. I have repeatedly quoted Phil 2:12-13 as our view on cooperation. I am baffled on your inability to ascertain what "cooperation" means and how it somehow takes God out of the picture!!!
I find it a pity that you find the Bible so inadequate that it must be supplemented by the words of popular men.
Then why do you read commentaries? Why do you listen to pastors and their interpretations? Are you being hypocritical now?
How do you not see that THEREFORE, God's promises are of no value to any particular person because no one can know if they apply to him?
LOL! The Bible tells us IF we persevere, IF we obey the commandments, we are IN Christ. Thus, the promise is for us, IF we continue to persevere in the Lord.
I have no idea what (who) spoke to those missionaries originally. Isn't it ironic that you are the one who presumes to know? :)
Now, substitute yourself into this scenario - "isn't it ironic that you are the one who presumes to know "who" spoke to you"?
I wrote "What does Paul say about that in 1 Cor 10:12?
You responded He says we should never take our salvation for granted
Perhaps you should read the Scriptures again...
"Wherefore lest he fall. Seems pretty clear to me, by the plain reading of Scripture, that Paul is warning the Corinthians to not be overconfident. His story of the Jews who DIED in the desert is clearly a warning that the SAME is possible spiritually for Christians. Again, you are twisting Scriptures. Read the context of the verses immediately proceeding. Paul is talking about DEATH!
But then you said that Christ completed His mission by earning the remission of the sin of all mankind. Does that mean He earned it and is keeping it in His pocket until we do something to earn it for ourselves?
All sin is potentially forgiven as a result of Christ's work. However, to claim that forgiveness, we must ASK for it! WE must repent and convert. Isn't that clear from loads of Scripture that WE are required to respond to God's graces of faith and repentence? Over and over, God's forgiveness is seen as conditional, based on our own turning to Him. Recite the Lord's Prayer slowly, for example.
That doesn't match what you have said before, and it doesn't sound complete at all.
Adam completed our downfall, but according to you, Christ did nothing of the sort in opposite. Christ only bought us a lottery ticket, for a "chance". I just think Christ is much more powerful than this. You appear to be making Adam more powerful that Christ.
Adam has given us original sin, but WE ALSO freely choose to disobey God. Thus, WE choose death, separation from God. Christ has, in the same fashion, won salvation for men, but again, they must CHOOSE life, union with God (with the tools that God has given us, not by ourselves).
Regards
That is because only isolated verses seem to contradict free will, whereas the entire body of scripture directly supports it:
Man has free-will: otherwise counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments would be in vain
Where do you think Aquinas finds these "counsels, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards, and punishments"? These are waht the scipture is filled with.
Either I'm absolutely correct or I'm a heretic.
Some statements are correct but used as attempt to prove an error. If you say, "the sun always comes up" I would agree, but not when you continue: "... at night". You are a heretic, but you quote scripture you have no understadning of -- as it is clear form your posts and my corrections to them on this thread alone. Or you say vague stuff that is correct but means little by itself, and think you closed an argument. That is intellectual crudity.
If you feel the true mechanism of "ordaining" and "carrying out" by God is through the "free will of man", then you really don't believe in ANY intervention of God throughout history.
And this is another example of said crudity. Miraculous interventions that overcome the will are common throughout the scripture, as well as acts of God that bypass man and work through the forces of nature.
At least in my discussions with you I always took the literal meaning. What is typically happening though is that the Protestants tend to look at the scripture myopically and overlook the context. It does not make their reading plain or literal, it makes it incorrect.
There are things in the faith of the fathers that do not come directly from the scripture, such as veneration of saints. But when the scripture is the direct justification for a doctrine, it is read literally. It is not read literalistically as if theology were a Bible quoting bee.
IF we indeed share in His sufferings, IN ORDER THAT we may also share in His glory.
I'm sorry, what does this mean? Do you think that we Protestants do not face trials? :) God promises us that we will all face trials. Persevering through these are future included events to the moment of salvation.
Consult 1 Cor 6:9-10, for example, verses written to "saved Christians, heirs of Christ". Seems quite clear by the literal interpretation.
I did consult the passage, and I am amazed that it appears that you would take it this far out of obvious context. Here is the complete thought:
1 Cor. 6:9-11 : 9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. [PAST TENSE!] (emphasis added)
You left out verse 11, which explains everything. Otherwise, anyone who ever commits any of these sins is doomed FOREVER! This passage says NOTHING about running to a priest for forgiveness. THAT is the literal interpretation of 9-10.
And Jews, including Jesus, was circumcised at 8 days. Is God now going from a greater to a lesser Covenant by restricting the members of the Church? Also, YOUR faith??? IF faith is a gift (which it is), then why do YOU need to proclaim it to receive Baptism? It is already within you as a seed given by God when He predestined the elect!
I am not sure I am following you. Are you saying that salvation used to be obtained through circumcision? We need to proclaim our faith in order to be Baptized in order to mimic what was done in the Bible. It is true that those among the elect are predestined to be so, which is another reason why we see Baptism as being symbolic of an already completed event. It is complete to "us" at the point of salvation, and we are to be Baptized soon thereafter, if possible, as an obedience to God.
Jesus told the Apostles to not prevent the little ones from coming to Him. But that is what you do by withholding Baptism to someone who makes a faith declaration (which isn't even from them!)
The youngest I have ever seen in my church to get Baptized I think was six years old. All have to be able to demonstrate through a testimony that they understand "the basics". This one did, in spades. It is not uncommon at all to see 8,9, or 10 year-olds do the same in my church. I would consider all of these to be "little ones" Biblically speaking.
FK: "Those who are already saved (already have their inheritance sealed), but have fallen away, will always come back to the Father. He has ordained it."
Saved in who's point of view? The person or God? Since we don't know God's mind, this doesn't help much in "KNOWING" that a 'saved' person will return to God.
Saved from God's POV. I am talking about hypothetically looking at other people. If I see someone I have guessed is saved fall away, I do not know if he will come back, but I will certainly try to be of help in any way I can. That's why I do not make presumptions about other people. If I fall away seriously, then either God will "touch" me directly, or He will move others to do it. Either way, I will be brought back. God says so.
If a person makes a choice where he is not compelled by necessity, it is a free will choice.
Hmmm. That's a new term. What is a choice "compelled by necessity"? Let's say you had a loved one who needed an operation that was very expensive. You didn't have all the money for it, but you thought there was a 50-50 chance you would be able to raise it in time. If I came up to you and said: "Jo, I'll give you $1,000,000 for you pen, what do you say?" When you say 'YES', you would see this as a free will choice? Kinda sounds like an offer you can't refuse, doesn't it?
FK: "The only conclusion, from what you have said, is that God does not love His children equally."
AHH! NOW we're getting somewhere. Yes, that is part of the mystery of God's Providence and election of the predestined. It is apparent that some of God's children will disinherit Him. God loves all humans, but applies His gifts differently to different people. We don't know why.
Wow! I really didn't expect to hear that. :) I developed this idea in other posts subsequent to the one I am responding to now. I can't wait to hear more, when I catch up.
Agree. I think what FK is getting at is that anything that doesn't meet HIS "plain reading" of the Scripture is not plain reading of the Scriptures. The last 500 posts have shown that "plain reading" is not so plain to all. Plain reading must take into account the Scriptures as a whole and the context in which they are read.
I think he is still upset about Romans 3 and how Psalm 119 over and over disagree with each other (plainly speaking!)
"Blessed [are] they that keep his testimonies, [and that] seek him {God} with the whole heart. They also do no iniquity: they walk in his ways". Psalm 119:2-3.
With my whole heart have I sought thee: O let me not wander from thy commandments. Psalm 119:10
This continues for the next 166 verses... It is hard to miss the plain meaning.
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. Romans 3:11
Here is another way that the plain meaning requires interpretation...
"The fool hath said in his heart, [There is] no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, [there is] none that doeth good. " Psalm 14:1, and virtually repeated in Psalm 53:1
Is the Psalmster talking about the fool or ALL men???!!! Context, brother.
Why is it so difficult to see that it is the FOOL that Paul is talking about, the wicked - not mankind in general?
Regards
That sharing in Christ's glory is dependent upon our sharing in His suffering. There is a connection between God glorifying us and our action here on earth.
You left out verse 11, (1 Cor 6:9-10) which explains everything. Otherwise, anyone who ever commits any of these sins is doomed FOREVER!
"And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God" 1 Cor 6:11
I really think you need to sit down with the Scriptures and read them. Again, you are wrong. Do you really think that Paul is saying "well, because you were washed of your former sins, you are free to commit the same sins again - and you'll still be saved"? OF COURSE we were washed of our former sins. But that doesn't give us free reign to re-visit those sins. Paul CLEARLY says that "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, etc., will enter the Kingdom of heaven." THOSE WHO ARE CURRENTLY doing these deeds! What makes you think that Christians who return to their former ways will STILL enter the Kingdom? That is ridiculous and is ANTI-Scriptural, even in this plain passage.
Here is another example from Paul on the matter:
"Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do (PRESENT OR FUTURE TENSE!) such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God" Gal 5:19-21. Then Paul goes on to compare the FRUIT of the HOLY SPIRIT... "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts (have you crucified your flesh from affections?). If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit." Gal 5:22-25
And finally:
For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. Heb 10:26-27
I suppose I am again misunderstanding the clear text??? Seems awfully destructive to this concept that those who are baptized or regenerated CANNOT fall!
This passage says NOTHING about running to a priest for forgiveness. THAT is the literal interpretation of 9-10.
Big deal. It doesn't say that Jesus rose from the dead in this passage, either. What is your point?
I am not sure I am following you. Are you saying that salvation used to be obtained through circumcision?
A person became a member of the people of God through the rite of circumcision. We become Christians through Baptism. In both cases, a person has taken the first step towards union with God - although in Baptism, we are much more greatly blessed, as the Holy Spirit HIMSELF comes to us.
It is true that those among the elect are predestined to be so, which is another reason why we see Baptism as being symbolic of an already completed event. It is complete to "us" at the point of salvation, and we are to be Baptized soon thereafter, if possible, as an obedience to God.
WHY? If God has already predestined you for election, what is the purpose of Baptism - per your theology? Obedience to God? Would this remove you from the elect, then?
I would consider all of these to be "little ones" Biblically speaking.
The "little ones" in Luke's Gospel includes infants in the Greek.
I do not make presumptions about other people. If I fall away seriously, then either God will "touch" me directly, or He will move others to do it.
Or you are never saved to begin with, according to your theology. I have discussed this very same topic with people who "KNEW" they were saved and KNEW it for years. Then, they fell away from the faith. So this "knowledge" they had was false, in retrospect, wasn't it?
"Jo, I'll give you $1,000,000 for you pen, what do you say?" When you say 'YES', you would see this as a free will choice? Kinda sounds like an offer you can't refuse, doesn't it?
And if you got that money through ill-repute, would the situation be the same? I CAN refuse this money. People do it all the time. It is called "principle". Some refuse to accept money, even though they desperately need it. Some would not take it if it was "blood money". Sorry, people are not so willing to dismiss their principles as you seem to believe.
Wow! I really didn't expect to hear that. :) {that God gives His gifts unequally}
This shouldn't be a surprise. Christ Himself tells us this in such places as the Parable of the Talents (Mat 25). God expects us to give EVERYTHING that He gave us BACK TO HIM. Our faith, repentence, desire to love, etc., FREELY. The man who received ONE talent did nothing with what he received - and was prevented from entering the Kingdom. Scary thought for those who are quietists and think that God does everything.
Regards
LOL. So very true. The inconsistencies mount as God is forced to dance to the fife and drum of men...
He's either God or He's not. We are sentient beings and we think we're autonomous; we think we're acting apart from any force other than our own instincts and desires, sometimes influenced by God, but certainly not controlled.
But if we believe in a sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient Creator of heaven and earth and everything therein, then logically we must assume we are living lives already ordained by the very definition of the One who created everything.
If God knows tomorrow because He created tomorrow, then tomorrow will follow the course set down by God's perfect, determining will.
And while we may feel like every moment we live is the first time that moment has been conceived of, in reality, that moment was determined by God from before the foundation of the world, most especially before men's volition could act upon that moment, or even conceive of that moment. Because NOTHING precedes God's predestining will, especially not any possible good action or right decision on the part of the fallen creature. "There is none righteous; no, not one." (Romans 3:10).
God spends a lot of time in the Bible explaining human nature. Because of our first father, we are sinners and incapable of saving ourselves, just like the Jews were incapable of saving themselves through the very Laws God had given them.
Did this surprise God? No. This was God's plan in order to show the world that NOTHING can save men except Jesus Christ.
Only Christ's payment for our sins can wipe the slate clean, both in the Old Testament and the New. And when the time came that was appointed by God, Christ was born to illustrate and implement God's perfect plan of salvation.
No laws, no good works, no human will can save the fallen sinner. Only the recompense of Christ's blood can atone for our sins, blood shed for those who have been given faith in Him.
And none of us knows the names of the elect. Thus we preach to all men so that all the sheep whom Christ came to gather will hear the words of truth, and be saved.
All according to His perfect plan for His creation, ordained, determined, written and willed by Him from before the foundation of the world. Every jot and tittle.
And that understanding is a stupendous, liberating, profoundly reassuring gift to His saints. Unlike what has been termed here, "the gift of free will," which is pretty laughable. A gift that apparently can lead to damnation is no gift at all. It's vanity and hubris and true anxiety.
We're told the devil works in "subtlety and mischief." And part of his warfare is to whisper into our ears, "Do as you will. You can do it. You're free."
But when we acknowledge God as our light and Savior and only hope, we are grateful that our will is subservient to His in all things.
No one is prevented from believing. And all who possess Trinitarian faith do so because it is the will of God. That's not a contradiction; that is the reality of the God who reveals Himself through Scripture and the working of the Holy Ghost.
"And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." -- Acts 13:39
And who believes?
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -- Acts 13:47-48"For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
Chosen to believe.
I don't think an understanding in Predestination is necessary for salvation. However, unlike the false assumption of "free will," it is a true gift from God, given at His pleasure for the peace and joy and comfort and safety of His sheep. The only losers regarding Predestination are those men and institutions who seek to convince other men that we are autonomous beings, and thus we can and should hand over our lives and liberty to them.
God's will first; man's will follows. It may seem unfair to us at times, but if "fairness" were God's primary interest in us, we would ALL be damned. None of us would refuse the serpent's offer.
Thankfully, "Mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:13).
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.