Challenge to all here.

[pablope]

porthos11;10255723:

Yeah I am confused as well lol. I asked him his theological views with no anwer yet.

Yes…I asked him in my first post…to lay out his position.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Man talk about have large reading asignments.

I will try to read that tome but does he explain Romans 9:20-23 and why people would object?

Just keyword search the article for “vessel” or something like that.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I have found almost all RC’s woefully ignorgant of scripture…along with most protestants.

Try to not make that assumption when talking with someone new, because when you do find a studied Catholic, you might miss it for clinging to a stereotype.

 

[Ignatius]

Ignatius;10254116:

earl40;10252773:

Give ANY explanation to verses in Romans 9:11-13 that can elicit a response that Paul knew would come in verses 20-23. If you can do this by saying it is not discussing election and reprobation you win.

11 (for the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, in order that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not by works, but by Him that calleth),
12 it was said unto her, “The elder shall serve the younger.”
13 As it is written: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”

20 But nay, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, “Why hast thou made me thus?”
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor?
22 What if God, choosing to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction;

Why do you think what Paul was talking about was “election and reprobation” when those terms did not even exist until the 14th century?

Why do you think what Paul was talking about was “election and reprobation” when those terms did not even exist until the 14th century?

I assure you election and reprobate are indeed used in the bible. .

Your assurances notwithstanding, we’ll need something somewhat more substantial than that. Please give proof from scripture alone that your interpretation with regard to those verses referring to reprobation is so.

 

[livingwordunity]

The only way predestination makes sense is in how the Church was predestined to be saved. Christ gave all of his authority to teach on these matters to the Church (the bishops and Peter in particular). The Pope is Peter for today’s world.

 

[guanophore]

The assertion made are attempts to get you to read the bible and it’s plain reading of what it means. IOW I have found almost all RC’s woefully ignorgant of scripture…along with most protestants. So that challenge is to anybody. What is interesting is that most RC side with most of the baptist I have come across.

I think you will find Catholics here on CAF not so “ignorgant” of scripture as the run of the mill Catholic in the pew, or not using the pew.

It is not RC’s "siding with Baptists. The fact is that some Baptists have retained some of the Apostolic faith which resides in Catholicism.

 

[porthos11]

The only way predestination makes sense is in how the Church was predestined to be saved. Christ gave all of his authority to teach on these matters to the Church (the bishops and Peter in particular). The Pope is Peter for today’s world.

It’s much more than that; there is a whole theology of predestination and reprobation and it’s not about the Church as a whole but individual people predestined to salvation and damnation. As I and several others have already said, predestination and reprobation are Catholic teachings and our support includes the very verses the original poster used. Hence our confusion because he seems to be challenging us on concepts we at least hold in common as taught by those passages, and we don’t know why.

 

[guanophore]

I just looked at this and it is obvious that a ton of equivocation on the clear meaning of the text is ignored by appealing to outside sourses. Though he attempts to explain why people would object though he puts men’s free will over God’s. That is a serious problem for those who want The Lord of the universe to rule over all, Face it Paul and Calvins God is bigger than yours. jk

Actually I think it is the opposite. Catholics believe that the God of the universe created us according to His own likeness and image. This means that He chose to fulfill His plans through allowing us to exercise choice. His ability to fulfill His intentions through the cooperation of fallible human beings is unlimited, because He is omnipotent.

BTW, Paul is Catholic, and his concept of God is a Catholic Concept.

Calvin’s idea of God was contaminated by his own perceptions and life expereineces, just as we all suffer.

 

[earl40]

It’s much more than that; there is a whole theology of predestination and reprobation and it’s not about the Church as a whole but individual people predestined to salvation and damnation. As I and several others have already said, predestination and reprobation are Catholic teachings and our support includes the very verses the original poster used. Hence our confusion because he seems to be challenging us on concepts we at least hold in common as taught by those passages, and we don’t know why.

I am coming from a biblical Calvinistic viewpoint. I know many will be “upset” by saying "biblical Calvinistic " but if one thinks mans “free will” overcomes God’s will the charge that one is not thinking like Paul or Calvin in Romans 9 stands. I understand the RC church has a doctrine of predestination though I do believe Romans 9:20-23 would not apply to its understanding of such (predestination).

 

[guanophore]

I am coming from a biblical Calvinistic viewpoint. I know many will be “upset” by saying "biblical Calvinistic "

Why would that “upset” anyone? Catholics use an identical method.

Biblical Calvanists approach the Scriptures with a Calvanistic systematic theological pair of lenses. When they read the Scriptures, they interpret through the lenses of Calvanism.
This method enables them to reinforce the doctrines created by Calvin by use of the Holy Scriptures.

Catholics use the same method, but with different lenses. We read Scripture through the lens of Sacred Tradition (the Teaching of the Apostles infallibly preserved in the Church through the Holy Spirit). Thus, we understand what is written from the point of view of those who wrote it. This enables us to understand what is written from within the One Faith that produced it.

but if one thinks mans “free will” overcomes God’s will the charge that one is not thinking like Paul or Calvin in Romans 9 stands.

I agree. Calvin’s concept of “free will” is a significant departure from what Paul and the other Apostles taught. The innonvative doctrine of total depravity influences how “free will” is understood, and in fact, no such thing exists in Calvin’s model.

Calvin rejected the idea of God creating humans out of His love, for the purpose of relationship with them, focusing instead on God doing everything for His Own Glory. For Catholics, the two are not separated, and God glorifies Himself THROUGH His people.

Eph 3:8-10
…the boundless riches of Christ, 9 and to make everyone see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; 10 so that **through the church **the wisdom of God in its rich variety might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places.

Calvin espoused monergism, over against the Apostolic Teaching of synergism, so for him, human will is pitted against the divine will, and human beings are incapable of “choosing” the good.

I understand the RC church has a doctrine of predestination though I do believe Romans 9:20-23 would not apply to its understanding of such (predestination).

Of course it does!

The New Testament was written by, for, and about Catholics. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic.

 

[PRmerger]

Calvin rejected the idea of God creating humans out of His love, for the purpose of relationship with them, focusing instead on God doing everything for His Own Glory.

I find many similarities between Calvin’s view of God and the Islamic view of Allah. There is little reference to love as a Father to a son, but more allusions to God’s sovereignty and power in both theologies.

 

[porthos11]

I am coming from a biblical Calvinistic viewpoint. I know many will be “upset” by saying "biblical Calvinistic " but if one thinks mans “free will” overcomes God’s will the charge that one is not thinking like Paul or Calvin in Romans 9 stands. I understand the RC church has a doctrine of predestination though I do believe Romans 9:20-23 would not apply to its understanding of such (predestination).

First of all, don’t assume Paul and Calvin think alike. They don’t. Calvin’s own thoughts on free will were derived in isolation from other parts of Scripture.

The Catholic Church does not teach that man’s free will overcomes God’s own infallible will. God’s will always prevails .

Conversely, God’s infallible will also does not trump man’s free will. This is Catholic teaching as well.

And here is where the Catholic teaching gets it right on predestination and reprobation. God does predestine some to heaven and some to hell, but always with man’s free will in mind.

So now clarify please. Are you denying that man has free will at all?

 

[pablope]

I am coming from a biblical Calvinistic viewpoint. I know many will be “upset” by saying "biblical Calvinistic " but if one thinks mans “free will” overcomes God’s will the charge that one is not thinking like Paul or Calvin in Romans 9 stands.

Can you provide the source or Catholic document where it states what you believe that the CC teaches that man’s free will overcomes God?

I understand the RC church has a doctrine of predestination though I do believe Romans 9:20-23 would not apply to its understanding of such (predestination).

 

[porthos11]

Can you provide the source or Catholic document where it states what you believe that the CC teaches that man’s free will overcomes God?

Exactly. Before we even begin to discuss, we can’t have an assumption that the Catholic church teaches something she doesn’t. So far, Earl has made an assumption that man’s free will overcomes God’s own will, which isn’t true.

 

[porthos11]

Exactly. Before we even begin to discuss, we can’t have an assumption that the Catholic church teaches something she doesn’t. So far, Earl has made an assumption that man’s free will overcomes God’s own will, which isn’t true.

I should rephrase. Earl has made an assumption that Catholics believe that man’s free will overcomes God’s own will, which isn’t true.

.

 

[guanophore]

I find many similarities between Calvin’s view of God and the Islamic view of Allah. There is little reference to love as a Father to a son, but more allusions to God’s sovereignty and power in both theologies.

Sometimes we project our unresolved psychological and sociological issues upon our perceptions of God.

 

[guanophore]

Can you provide the source or Catholic document where it states what you believe that the CC teaches that man’s free will overcomes God?

No. The CC does not teach this. She teaches that man has free will, and that God is omnicient, and knows what each person will choose before they do so.

Unless you are imbued with revelation from God directly, I would advise caution before you make states where the Catholic understanding does not apply or statements of such.

One does not need to be imbued with Divine Revelaton from God directly to know Catholic Doctrine. However, after one learns it, at that point one is so imbued.

 

[PeaceInChrist]

First of all, don’t assume Paul and Calvin think alike. They don’t. Calvin’s own thoughts on free will were derived in isolation from other parts of Scripture.

The Catholic Church does not teach that man’s free will overcomes God’s own infallible will. God’s will always prevails .

Conversely, God’s infallible will also does not trump man’s free will. This is Catholic teaching as well.

And here is where the Catholic teaching gets it right on predestination and reprobation. God does predestine some to heaven and some to hell, but always with man’s free will in mind.

So now clarify please. Are you denying that man has free will at all?

I was under the impression that Church teaching on the matter of determinism teaches that God does NOT predestine to hell. I thought that the damned damn themselves, and that God, knowing this, could have given them more grace, but does not, which is where Romans 9 comes into effect. Can someone clarify with references, preferably to the catechism?

 

[porthos11]

I was under the impression that Church teaching on the matter of determinism teaches that God does NOT predestine to hell. I thought that the damned damn themselves, and that God, knowing this, could have given them more grace, but does not, which is where Romans 9 comes into effect. Can someone clarify with references, preferably to the catechism?

The current Catechism omits any mention of predestination to hell, but historically, it is indeed Catholic teaching that God does predestine to reprobation. Unlike what the Calvinists hold, the Catholic (specifically, the Molinist) view always accounts for man’s free will and states that God, in his omniscience knows how each person will respond to his grace and in light of that, sets a specific order of grace. Those he knows will use their free will to respond to that grace he predestines to heaven, while those he knows will freely reject his grace (that is, in light of their foreseen demerits), he predestines to hell.

Your theory from the looks of it is more in line with the Thomist view, which is also acceptable in Catholic teaching.

What we are to reject is the Calvinist view that God actively pre-ordains people to hell without any preconsideration of their future demerits (something like a predestination to hell “just for the heck of it.”) We are, however permitted to agree with Calvin that God can predestine people to heaven without any preconsideration of their merits and he gives grace he knows they will infallibly use their free will to respond to.

 

[Nita]

I am coming from a biblical Calvinistic viewpoint. I know many will be “upset” by saying "biblical Calvinistic " but if one thinks mans “free will” overcomes God’s will the charge that one is not thinking like Paul or Calvin in Romans 9 stands. I understand the RC church has a doctrine of predestination though I do believe Romans 9:20-23 would not apply to its understanding of such (predestination).

We don’t believe man’s free will overcomes God’s will; we believe that we have free will precisely because that is what God willed.