Here are two passages I found. One is in Luke 22:1-3, describing the Wednesday before: "1 Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, called the Passover, was approaching, 2 and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some way to get rid of Jesus, for they were afraid of the people. 3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve.
But the clincher is in John 13:2: "2 The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus."
God knew satan would enter Judas and He allowed it. Sounds like a plan.
The important thing is, Judas could have repented afterwords, just as Adam could have repented. He could have chosen to die with Christ on the cross. He could have asked for His forgiveness. He chose not to. ... However God's Plan was degined, we are offered a chance to be that thief on the right side of our Lord who repented.
This is very interesting to me. You appear to agree with me and everyone else that Judas did not repent and was not saved. When you also brought in the thief on the cross it got me to thinking. Here is what we know about the thief:
Luke 23:40-43 : 40 But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong." 42 Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." 43 Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."
And this is the last we know of Judas:
Matt. 27:3-5 : 3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. 4 "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." 5 So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.
Isn't that an eerie comparison? We all believe that the thief was saved, but Judas was not. The key difference between eternal salvation and eternal hell came down to one sentence? Judas "missed it by that much"? I don't know, it still sounds like a plan to me, with the added bonus of illustrating the simplicity of salvation.
The problem with Protestant theology is that repentance becomes meaningless in the elect-and-condmened-from-eternity scheme of things, as does Adam's sin and even Christ's redemption.
Protestants agree that we must repent of our sins. I believe John the Baptist spoke on this issue a time or two. :) We only disagree on how that happens. Our side simply says that the ability to repent comes from God, because it is not in us when we are born and we cannot acquire it through our own means. I would guess that your side says that repentance is an independent choice of the individual.
If we are made to sin, because we are just God's puppets-on-the-string, to repent would mean to say I am sorry for something we had no control over.
I wouldn't agree to a puppet analogy. God's love for us is much different than that He could have for any inanimate object. On your last point, I would say that Protestants believe that we are all born into sin, through Adam. We have no control over our nature to sin. I thought Catholics believe that we are born with a tendency to sin and I would presume that they would also agree that all have sinned.
Therefore, do you believe that you had the free choice to not sin from birth? Have you always been in control? When you repent and confess, you say you're sorry only for those things in your direct control? I supposed in an earlier post that 8 billion people have ever lived. Does it sound like we are in control if the sin count just happens to turn out to be 8 billion, minus one, to one?
Catholics (and Orthodox, if I may) also believe that repentance is inspired within us by God. But not irrestibly. Even the "saved" (your definition) do not repent for everything. People who are "saved" hold grudges for many years towards people who are family members. That is our human nature. As I have mentioned before, God gives us sufficient grace in all cases to make the decision to say "I forgive you" or "God, forgive me". Unfortunately, some choose not to do this. Forgiveness, then, is not independent. To help me with this, I think about the parable of the sower and the seed. The ground that the seed falls upon will determine the fruit, correct? Of course, without the seed, there will be NO FRUIT! We cannot bear fruit without being part of the vine...
I would say that Protestants believe that we are all born into sin, through Adam. We have no control over our nature to sin. I thought Catholics believe that we are born with a tendency to sin and I would presume that they would also agree that all have sinned.
Technically, we believe we are born without sanctifying grace (the inner life of God). As a result, we are not abiding in Christ. Since we can do NOTHING to achieve heaven by ourselves, we are born in a state where we cannot achieve heaven - which many will say is a state of sin. It is not personal sin, but it is sin just the same, because anything without God is sin. Original sin leaves us with the tendency to choose evil, which doesn't go away after we are 'saved', without God's graces.
Whether we have it in our control to sin or not is probably more a general statement. Before I turned to God, I found that I was able to do good, but usually, looking back, I choose the "evil" or something that was my will, not God's will. Catholics have a different idea of anthropology, the plight of man. We believe that man is wounded, man cannot choose the good often. Even when we do, it is out of poor motives. Naturally, we cannot do what is necessary to achieve heaven without God. All men have eventually turned from God at some point in their lives. But again, we don't call man totally depraved, but wounded. We CAN choose good, sometimes, as God has placed His Law into all men's hearts - with sufficient grace to obey it. Most men, though, without knowledge of Christ, will not obey this law. Thus, the greater need of Christ in our lives in an active sense.
Therefore, do you believe that you had the free choice to not sin from birth? Have you always been in control?
I think our sinful tendencies are likely to drown out that "natural law" placed in our hearts by God without God's further graces found in the sacraments and so forth.
When you repent and confess, you say you're sorry only for those things in your direct control?
Scripture points to also being sorry for involuntary or unknown sins. We are urged to examine ourselves, but to also be sorry for any ways in which we offended God, intentionally or not.
Brother in Christ
Being sorry is not repentance. Repentance (metanoia in Greek) means changing your mind for the better -- so that you never repeat the same error. It is a difficult and life-defining moment to repent of something. Unfortunately, people take it very lightly -- it's a lot more than saying "I'm sorry."
Judas could have repented and asked God for forgiveness if he truly believed that life without Christ is meaningless. Instead, he gave in to hate, he followed Satan's advice raher than God's.
Our side simply says that the ability to repent comes from God, because it is not in us when we are born and we cannot acquire it through our own means
My point is this: if everything is set in stone, and everything has been predetermined by His foreknowledge (Protestant error), then we are on a set of tracks that allow no deviation and nothing will change what destination we arrive at. God is in the driver's seat; He gave us a ticket, but it's up to us to get on the right train.
Protestants believe that God actually puts us either on the train destined to hell or to paradise! You don't see anything wrong with that teaching? I wish you would.