I know you wrote this sentence, but did you read it? :) "Eternal" means incomplete and conditional??? That can only speak for itself.
Heaven is union with Christ, brother! I cannot believe this is new to you! What part of this don't you get?
The part that stands John 3:16 on its ear! :) To me, "eternal life" means eternal life in heaven in the presence of and in communion with, God. "Eternal death" means eternal life in hell, permanently away from God. You appear to be saying that "eternal" means "maybe". However, the more I think about it, this may be the best "out" you have in Catholicism. If the promise in John 3:16 was actually true, and since it is in the present tense, then that would concretely confirm the ideas of salvation before death, and assurance while alive. Such ideas must be eliminated. So, if "eternal" can be changed to mean "not eternal, but fleeting", then that kills two birds with one stone. Whoever thought it up, I do give him credit.
The word "justice" means the same thing to God and to us.
Really??? How about the word "love"? Does that mean the same thing to God as it does to man? You're giving us corporeals a wee bit too much credit I think. :)
How exactly does man persevere if God does everything? Don't you mean "God perseveres"?
Yes, the elect of men persevere by God acting through them. So, your correction is better.
FK: "I think I'm on fairly safe ground in saying that no Catholic baby has a punched ticket into heaven upon infant baptism."
You are wrong. Our salvation ABSOLTULEY DEPENDS on the presence of sanctifying grace within us to enter heaven. Without this, we cannot enter heaven. It is a freely given gift by God, as a seed planted in the ground, that bears fruit later in the infant's life.
Huh? Could you read what I said again? If I am still wrong, then I am not fairly safe, but fairly lost. :) You are now espousing a OSAS model from infant baptism. For you, this is a bit.... irregular. :)
Sanctifying grace, while present, guarantees heaven to those who have it. This presence does not necessarily remain with us once we receive it at Baptism.
LOL! So to those who have it, sanctifying grace is really, truly a "guarantee" of NOTHING. It is a temporary condition, that when lost, may or may not be restored. You call that a "guarantee"? When you go to get your car fixed, and the shop owner gives you a "guarantee" of his work, is this the sense in which you accept it? The work is guaranteed, until the car breaks down, and then it is no longer guaranteed, but might be again if you hire the same guy to fix it a second time?
Adam was born with a human nature that had no effects of original sin. ... In addition to this unadulterated humanity, Adam was given the "breath of God", the Spirit. This is something that exceeds the natural world. God's Spirit was not given to any other material creation.
Except ........., or as some good Catholics believe also .........., or if you're Orthodox perhaps even ......... :)
FK: "My argument is that it was necessary, to satisfy His own rules."
Love is not necessary. Love is freely given, not something required.
I wasn't referring to His rules of love, but His rules of His justice. Man is sinful, making him wholly unfit for heaven. All men. A price must be paid in atonement. This is God's way as we see throughout the OT. Man does not have the required price, only God does. So He decides to pay it Himself out of love for His creation. But what is this price exactly? What would be enough to "cover" the debt? My argument was that if the true answer was a finger snap or a prayer, AND He decided to die on the cross anyway, then that would have been unnecessary suicide. That would not have been true love at all.
My position is that therefore, the God-determined price, according to His justice, must have been the death of Christ on the cross. That makes the sacrifice real, and fully selfless. It was necessary and He did it because if He did not do it, none of us are saved.
"LOL! So to those who have it, sanctifying grace is really, truly a "guarantee" of NOTHING. It is a temporary condition, that when lost, may or may not be restored. You call that a "guarantee"? When you go to get your car fixed, and the shop owner gives you a "guarantee" of his work, is this the sense in which you accept it? The work is guaranteed, until the car breaks down, and then it is no longer guaranteed, but might be again if you hire the same guy to fix it a second time?"
FK, you didn't read the link I posted on Palamas, did you! You'll never get that M.Div in Orthodox Theology at this rate! :)
Jo, was the light at Mount Tabor created or uncreated in your understanding? It seems to me that we are fast approaching a point in this discussion where differing understandings of grace/divine energies is becoming important. It is clear that both Latin and Orthodox theology have well developed theologies of grace. It appears to me that the Protestants have a rather less developed conception. Might it not be time to start defining our terms a bit more precisely since I think we are reaching a point where we are using the same word, grace, to describe rather different concepts.
I won't be around much this weekend...still in the process of opening up the cottage and I've a problem with the water system (as well as a failed hot water heater element) which will take up a good deal of time.
To further explain. "Eternal Life" is not a status or a condition given to us. It is an Object, a Person, Jesus Christ, who comes to abide within us if we are born anew or obey the Commandments. This "Eternal Life" in John is synonymous with "Kingdom of Heaven" in the Synoptics. It is Christ's presence within the grace-filled man. It does not follow that "Eternal Life" will remain within us ETERNALLY! A man can disinherit himself from the Kingdom of Heaven - which casts out "Eternal Life" that was formerly residing within us. We ALWAYS have the ability to reject the Spirit while here on earth. "Eternal Life" in John's Gospel refers to a Person, not a status. Do you think Catholics believe that if they go to Communion (eat Christ's Body) that they are guaranteed heaven? That is what your interpretation of John 6 would tell us... I do grant you that context is important, and that sometimes, eternal life refers to life in heaven. But usually, John means the Person of Christ.
"eternal life" means eternal life in heaven in the presence of and in communion with, God.
Jesus DEFINES Eternal life : "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." John 17:3
That is the message of John's Gospel. To believe that Christ is God's messenger. HE is life eternal. He is not a status! In some instances, Paul talks about eternal life as you mention, but he also qualifies this by saying we can become disinherited by our actions. So even in Paul's case, eternal life is not guaranteed until after death.
How about the word "love"? Does that mean the same thing to God as it does to man? You're giving us corporeals a wee bit too much credit I think. :)
Our definitions are the same. It is our execution that is lacking. God taught us what love was through the death of His only Son. We "know" what love is. The problem is putting it into action.
Yes, the elect of men persevere by God acting through them. So, your correction is better.
So when Jesus tells us to be awake, to persevere, He really is talking to the Father? I disagree. God expects MAN to persevere by using the grace God gives men in each situation. God is not persevering through men. That is ridiculous - God judges MAN. We don't judge God for His perseverance through men.
If I am still wrong, then I am not fairly safe, but fairly lost. :) You are now espousing a OSAS model from infant baptism. For you, this is a bit.... irregular. :)
A baby has his "ticket punched" as a result of infant baptism because he has no stain of sin remaining. He has received sanctifying grace, and has no personal sin. What would keep him out of heaven, FK? Original sin and personal sin keep us out of heaven. A baby has had the former removed and doesn't have the latter. I don't see this a problem. Of course, we are presuming that the infant subsequently dies. Once a child commits mortal sin, all bets are off on this "ticket being punched".
So to those who have it, sanctifying grace is really, truly a "guarantee" of NOTHING. It is a temporary condition, that when lost, may or may not be restored. You call that a "guarantee"? When you go to get your car fixed, and the shop owner gives you a "guarantee" of his work, is this the sense in which you accept it? The work is guaranteed, until the car breaks down, and then it is no longer guaranteed, but might be again if you hire the same guy to fix it a second time?
A guarantee doesn't guarantee the problem will not re-occur. It means that IF it DOES, they will fix it for free! How can a human shop owner "guarantee" that a car will not break? The sacrament of Confession is our guarantee for us when we sin after Baptism. We call upon the work of Christ to free us from our self-imposed sin (not authored by God). Just because we have been Baptized doesn't guarantee we won't sin - but we have a guarantee that we can get fixed. Again, I don't see a problem here.
Man is sinful, making him wholly unfit for heaven. All men. A price must be paid in atonement. This is God's way as we see throughout the OT. Man does not have the required price, only God does.
So who does God pay?
My position is that therefore, the God-determined price, according to His justice, must have been the death of Christ on the cross. That makes the sacrifice real, and fully selfless. It was necessary and He did it because if He did not do it, none of us are saved.
I disagree with this concept of "Atonement", that God owes something to someone as to ransom man from something, although it is not necessarily a false belief, since some Church Fathers have held it. I realize that Paul uses this in comparison to Hebrew sacrifices, which discuss man atoning for sins through sacrifice. But God? Who does God owe anything to? I think this is a misinterpretation of the bible and has led to many problems in our relationship with God. It tends to cause us to forget that God is Love and rather focus on God as being Just. Of course, this is true, but God is Mercy and Love first, as James and John say. God sent His Son to die on the cross to show us His love for mankind, not because He was forced to out of some debt. Who can make God pay them anything? Even Satan cannot. The Catholic paradigm is that God is Love and Mercy first.
Regards