I see the problem that St. Augustine and others had when arguing a point of view. Sometimes, one can argue a side so aggressively that the balance is tilted. We have two apparently contradictory truths here: Man has free will And God desires that all men be saved. By arguing to aggressively "man has free will", it leaves God's divine sovereignty in apparent trouble. This is the problem with arguing such theological issues. We must not argue one too much - in either direction - that the other is excluded or contradicted. This is a difficult thing to do.
Because you hold to only ONE of these truths, I have been arguing free will. Probably more aggressively than need be. The truth of the matter is that we really don't know the interaction of these two TRUTHS. They are BOTH found in Scriptures and must BOTH be held! I see you only holding to one, while paying lip service to the other. This will not do. St. Augustine said that "faith comes first, then reason". Thus, we must have faith that BOTH of God's revelations are true - although we may not have the reasons to explain our particular discussion to our fullest mental satisfaction.
Men have the free will to choose God. Men are empowered, by God, to obey His commandments. Man will be judged based on how he complies. On the other hand, God desires all men to come to Him. He has the power to actually bring ALL men to Him if He desires this as a decree. God has ALWAYS desired men to come to Him and has empowered them with a desire to do so:
"And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD." Gen 4:26
Obviously, it is GOD who placed this desire within mankind! But why does God NOT give ALL men "efficacious grace"? Does He foresee their rejection? We have been arguing this off and on for quite awhile. All I can say for sure is that we must hold to both truths, not fully understanding the HOW.
This is for what I have labored so hard and for so long to hear. :) [Faith is not only something given by God to men, it is a RESPONSE to God's grace. Faith ALSO depends on man] I think this takes away from God's sovereignty, and this difference is one of the main points (tangentially, if not explicitly) of the original article of this thread. You can't really tell me then, that "everything" comes from God. It cannot, if your sense of free will really is true.
I have been reading and studying John's Gospel, the Gospel of Faith, as called by some. I think you may find your answers in there. God calls men to Him. But at the same time, faith is also a response to the message of Christ. Jesus preached to the entire audience, but only some came to follow Christ. Perhaps to help, it might do good to remember the Parable of the Sower and the Seed. The soil is man's response. It is certainly prepared and chosen by the Lord, but the seed, God's Word, falls on this soil. So the Word finds fruit in the faith in which a man responds to God's prompting. Christ is calling for a relationship between us and Him. A relationship requires a response when one makes the initiative. Our response is not our own, certainly. But it is not God alone, either. God has given us the gift to respond - but we must use it. And this is the daily choice we face. To sin or not.
Besides, what good are any of God's promises to those who persevere when none of them (those who persevere) can be known until after their dead?
God is promising that He will not pull the rug out from under those who respond to Him - NOT that God will reward us with heaven no matter what we do after our faith proclamation made 20 years ago. God's promises are for those who persevere. THEY will be the elect after the fact. God doesn't promise that those who enter the Church are the elect. Remember the parable of the wheat and the weeds? We just don't know that I am of the elect. We know that God will keep His promise to reward those who persevere, who obey His commandments, who ask for forgiveness of sins. He doesn't promise heaven to those with dead faith.
And of course the obvious question to you would be: Do you consider your sins to be a burden? Did God relieve you of that burden by dying on the cross, or does man take care of his own burden by doing deeds and sacraments to redeem his own burden of sin? I know you don't believe that. Is this a misunderstanding?
They are a burden until I confess them to our Lord and Savior, admitting my failure and promising to make an effort in the future to do better - with His help. I know many a Christian who ARE burden with sins. Some on this very thread seem to be burden with hatred for things Catholic. Hatred IS a burden that they carry, even though Christ died on the cross 2000 years ago. Christ only releases the burden of sin from those who turn to Him. Completely.
Regards
I appreciate your compromising tone, and I think you sum up our positions pretty well. My problem with "God wants all men to be saved" is NOT that I think God doesn't have enough love to spread around. :) Rather, it is that it is one of those statements that God, for His own reasons, is not willing to MAKE happen.
To me, it is like God saying He does not want anyone to sin. It's true, but God isn't going to effectuate it becoming true in full. I see this as very different from "God wants all of His elect to be saved". Here is a "real" example of something God wants, because He will do whatever it takes to make sure it happens in full. So, in a manner of speaking, God would have a "duty" to save the elect, but no such duty to the non-elect.
But why does God NOT give ALL men "efficacious grace"? Does He foresee their rejection? We have been arguing this off and on for quite awhile. All I can say for sure is that we must hold to both truths, not fully understanding the HOW.
I think it is the "HOW" we are mostly disagreeing on, the mechanics of what God does, and what God's "duties" are. I don't happen to think that God bases His grace decisions on His foreknowledge. But if He did, then He would detect a "no" answer on the part of someone who already had a "normal" level of grace. If God had really wanted this person to be saved, then at the point of foreknowledge (the beginning), why couldn't God have "upped the juice"? :)
God's promises are for those who persevere. THEY will be the elect after the fact.
But I thought you believed in single predestination. Is this a POV thing?
Christ only releases the burden of sin from those who turn to Him. Completely.
OK, I would call the group of those who turn to Him completely, the elect. If Christ only releases the burden of their sins, then we would agree that Christ did not die for the sins of all men, He only died for the sins of the elect.