Hell

[MichaelHowling]

Hey earl.

Make this easier for me to break apart… I’m a little slow.

What idea are you trying to put forth here ?

 

[MichaelHowling]

I did what you have asked and used google…

It sounds like you have a calvanist mindset.

I have found a webpage that puts all what you’re saying to rest in my eyes. Calvanism is wrong and here’s the proof if you choose to look into it:

vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/predestination-in-catholicism/

May the Holy Spirit open your eyes and call you quickly back home to hold you in saftey

Predestination in Catholicism

Filed under: Calvin, Predestination, Salvation — 20 Comments

August 12, 2007

While most Catholics hardly talk about it (and some might even think the Church does not teach it), predestination is one of the central teachings of the Catholic Church. Catholic Encyclopaedia defines Predestination as the Divine decree by which God, owing to His infallible prescience of the future, has appointed and ordained from eternity all events occurring in time, especially those which directly proceed from, or at least are influenced by, man’s free will.

Why there is predestination? Catholics believe that original sin makes us unable to reach salvation, not even will our salvation, without being first moved by God’s Grace. This leads to the question: Since the initiative of our salvation belongs to God, does He predestine who will go to heaven (the Elect) and who will go to hell (the Reprobate)?

All Christians believe in the predestination of the Elect – it is clearly stated in the Scripture (Matthew 25:34, Acts 13:48, Romans 8:28-30). In Catechism of the Catholic Church the term “the Elect” appears in a number of clauses (CCC # 769, 842, 1031, 1045, 1344). How does God predestine the Elect? Is it based on His foreknowledge of our response to His Grace or on His eternal decree when He created the world? The former view is known as Conditional Election and the latter as Unconditional Election. Protestants and “Bible only” Christians who adhere to Calvinism believe in the latter while the so called Arminianist Protestants believe in the former. Until now the Catholic Church does not declare dogmatically on how God predestines the Elect, whether it is Conditional or Unconditional Election. Catholics are still free to choose from a number of predestination views, among which are: Thomism (after Thomas Aquinas) and Molinism (after Luis de Molina). Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) was philosopher, theologian, Doctor of the Church and patron of Catholic universities, colleges and schools. Luis de Molina (1535-1600) was Jesuit theologian. Thomists (and some Molisnists) teach Unconditional Election while Molinism believes in the Conditional Election.

As for the Reprobate, Catholics believe that God predestines no one to hell. Scripture says God loves the world (John 3:16); He desires all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) and come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9) and that He has no pleasure on the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11). The belief that God predestines no one to evil has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church.

We not only do not believe that any are foreordained to evil by the power of God, but even state with utter abhorrence that if there are those who want to believe so evil a thing, they are anathema.

Council of Orange (529 AD)

If any one saith, that it is not in man’s power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.

Council of Trent, Canon VI of the Decrees on Justification

God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.

Catechism of the Catholic Church # 1037

Because God predestines no one to hell, Catholics believe He gives His Grace, through Christ, to everyone and calls every one, no exception, to salvation.

For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men.

Titus 2:11

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:22

“‘All men are called to this catholic [universal] unity of the People of God…. And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation.‘

 

[MichaelHowling]

Catechism of the Catholic Church # 836

If God gives His Grace to every one and desires all men to be saved, then why can’t all enter heaven? Scripture says that God gives His Grace lavishly to the Elect (Ephesians 1:7-8) and He has mercy but also hardens the hearts of whom He will (cf. Romans 9:18). This is something we cannot question – God is the potter and we are the clay (Romans 9:20-21). In Catholic Church’s terminology God gives the Elect sufficient and efficacious Grace while the Reprobates receive sufficient but inefficacious Grace. Catholics believe God gives everyone sufficient Grace to make him/her, using his/her freedom, turn to God and be saved. One way to explain it is using Jesus’ parable of the talents (Matthew 25:14-30). In the parable the Master gave different number of talents to his three servants according to their abilities. The Master obviously had the right to decide how many talents each servant received. The servant with only one talent was later condemned. Yet his Master did not intend to condemn him by giving him only one talent. Had he deposited it in the bank he would be fine like the other two. The servant was condemned for his own wrong action, i.e. hiding the single talent entrusted to him. Thus Catholics believe that condemnation of the Reprobate always involves their freedom to reject God’s Grace – in other words they are responsible for their damnation. Catholic’s view on Reprobation is called as Positive Conditional Reprobation – when God created the world He, being omniscience, foresaw the Reprobate’s rejection to His Grace and let them use their freedom to do so. Yet God still wants them to be saved and still gives them sufficient Grace.

“To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy. When therefore he establishes his eternal plan of ‘predestination’, he includes in it each person’s free response to his grace: ‘In this city, in fact, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place [Acts 4:27-28]. For the sake of accomplishing his plan of salvation, God permitted the acts that flowed from their blindness.

Catechism of the Catholic Church # 600

Protestants and “Bible only” Christians may or may not agree with Catholic’s position on Reprobation. Those who follow Calvinism believe in Positive Unconditional Reprobation, i.e. when God created the world, through His decree, He foreordained the Reprobate to damnation and consequently decided to withhold His Grace from them.

By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.

 

[MichaelHowling]

Westminster Confession III.3

As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God, as a righteous Judge, for former sins, does blind and harden, from them He not only withholds His grace whereby they might have been enlightened in their understandings, and wrought upon in their heart; but sometimes also withdraws the gifts which they had, and exposes them to such objects as their corruption makes occasion of sin; and, withal, gives them over to their own lusts, the temptations of the world, and the power of Satan, whereby it comes to pass that they harden themselves, even under those means which God uses for the softening of others.

Westminster Confession V.6

Westminster Confession is the confession of faith of English-speaking Presbyterians. It was completed in 1646 and approved after some revisions in June 1648. Calvinists believe in common grace, which is given to everyone, however it has nothing to do with salvation. This common grace concept explains why we can find goodness among non-Christians (i.e. the Reprobate), despite their totally deprived nature and it also comes in the form of God’s providence for all mankind – he [God] makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust (Matthew 5:45). To Calvinists what is reserved only to the Elect (and is irresistible to them) is special grace – it is the grace that makes them believe in Christ, sanctifies them and therefore saves them.

Others Protestants believe in Negative Unconditional Reprobation, i.e. God simply bypasses the Reprobate from receiving His Grace for no reason – and without God’s Grace they are doomed to hell. In both Positive and Negative Unconditional Reprobation God is behind the Reprobate’s damnation. In contrast Catholic position makes the Reprobate responsible for their damnation – God gives them sufficient Grace, which they reject using their freedom.

In Calvinist’ Unconditional Election and Reprobation the role of human freedom in responding to God’s Grace for their salvation or damnation is denied. They may argue that we still have freedom but to them it means freedom to choose evil.

“after the fall, though the will itself remains free, its capacity for choice is limited by the sinfulness of human nature. Human beings retain the capacity of choice, but all choosing occurs in the context of sin.”

Encyclopaedia of the Reformed Faith (Editor: Donald K. Mc Kim,) page 145

Catholics, on the other hand, believe that without God’s Grace we can neither believe in God nor obey His commandments – our salvation is impossible without God’s Grace but we have freedom to cooperate with that Grace or not.

To Calvinists God gives His (saving) Grace only to the Elect who can neither reject nor lose it. However Jude 4 says that those who were designated for condemnation pervert the Grace of God – something they cannot do if they do not receive it in the first place. The belief that God gives His Grace only to the Elect was condemned in the Council of Trent.

If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema.

Council of Trent, Canon XVII of the Decrees on Justification

Calvinists may use God’s sovereignty to defend their position. But here they make presumption, i.e. God first foreordained the Reprobate to eternal damnation when He created the world and because He is sovereign then His will must take place. Catholics do not deny that God is sovereign but He cannot contradict Himself. Scripture does say that God through Christ intends to save all mankind (Romans 5:18, 1 Corinthians 15:22, 1 Timothy 1:15, Titus 2:11) – He won’t contradict Himself by, through His decree, foreordaining some (the Reprobate) with no reason to hell.

 

[earl40]

Predestination in Catholicism

Filed under: Calvin, Predestination, Salvation — 20 Comments

August 12, 2007

While most Catholics hardly talk about it (and some might even think the Church does not teach it), predestination is one of the central teachings of the Catholic Church. Catholic Encyclopaedia defines Predestination as the Divine decree by which God, owing to His infallible prescience of the future, has appointed and ordained from eternity all events occurring in time, especially those which directly proceed from, or at least are influenced by, man’s free will.

‘

One bite at a time…Here we have God ordaining “all events”. I am OK with this IF one understands that God ordains what men believe (an event BTW). IOW God does not look down the corridor of time and ordains “all events”. If so He becomes a contingent being. God ordains all events based on His will.

“being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.”

“For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth”

 

[earl40]

Catechism of the Catholic Church # 600

Protestants and “Bible only” Christians may or may not agree with Catholic’s position on Reprobation. Those who follow Calvinism believe in Positive Unconditional Reprobation, i.e. when God created the world, through His decree, He foreordained the Reprobate to damnation and consequently decided to withhold His Grace from them.

By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.

Here we have the Catechism flatly denying scripture by saying Calvinism is wrong…but here the bible teaches that Calvinism CLEARLY is correct and to insinuate God is not in charge contradicts Paul in Romans.

11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, **that the purpose of God **according to election might stand, not of works, but of 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.

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

 

[PJM]

=earl40;10249200]Here we have the Catechism flatly denying scripture by saying Calvinism is wrong…but here the bible teaches that Calvinism CLEARLY is correct and to insinuate God is not in charge contradicts Paul in Romans.

11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, **that the purpose of God **according to election might stand, not of works, but of 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.

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

first my friend;

WELCOME to the FORUM!

I truly appreciate your views as well as your right to hold them. However if you want to discuss and not “pontificate” Bible references with verses are needed.

So if you’d kindly shre the source; I and no doubt others will gladly enter into a dialong with you:thumbsup:

God Bless,
pat/PJM

 

[MichaelHowling]

Hey Earl,

appreciate you reading all that I posted. I’d be more than happy to look at what your pointing …but I need the bible verses.

Thanks

 

[johnnyjones]

It is a fact that the way to destruction is broad and it is many who go that way. Hows is that for some biblical percentages?

That’s God speaking, not man slicing and dicing who goes where. A priest at my church recently gave a sermon on this subject. Man has no business saying this one is going here and another is going there.

 

[earl40]

That’s God speaking, not man slicing and dicing who goes where. A priest at my church recently gave a sermon on this subject. Man has no business saying this one is going here and another is going there.

I totally agree that we do not know who “makes it” but I will say what scripture says that all who die without faith in Jesus will go "there’ and that way is wide and broad which is a percentage.

An unfamiliar verse…John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.

 

[MichaelHowling]

the devil believes god’s exhistance

 

[earl40]

Protestants and “Bible only” Christians may or may not agree with Catholic’s position on Reprobation. Those who follow Calvinism believe in Positive Unconditional Reprobation, i.e. when God created the world, through His decree, He foreordained the Reprobate to damnation and consequently decided to withhold His Grace from them.

By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.

Romans 9 says that Esau was “hated” before he did any good or bad. That is the bible speaking first on the subject of election and reprobation. Calvinism is only reiterating Paul which we “bible only” Christians are also doing.

 

[MichaelHowling]

Firstly, the Catholic understanding of Romans, indeed the whole of Scripture, isn’t dependent on forming a theological construct and then shoehorning Bible verses into it. Some do that in order to make Scripture support what they want to think. That’s poor exegesis. The proper way to view Scripture is according to the intention of the author of the book. So, what is Paul’s intention here?

The key verse is: [8] This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants.

Paul is telling us that being a physical descendant of Israel was never enough to please God and he goes on to give his readers examples that make his point.

Paul does not say that God loved Jacob and hated Esau without knowing them, which is what is implied by saying “before their birth”. God knows each of us through and through from all eternity. Does he prevent people from being born if they aren’t going to do as he wills? No. Why? Because he has left conceiving and birthing our young up to us. He simply knows, not determines, who will do what/will conform to his will and who won’t. He didn’t make Esau sell his birthright to Jacob. Esau made that decision and God held him to it.

God makes good comes from evil. He uses our bad decisions and flaws and fallen nature to bring about his will even though he would much rather we didn’t sin. Because he does this doesn’t mean he causes men to sin. That is what Paul is saying, as I understand it.

also…

If Paul meant that God specially creates people for damnation, then Paul could not also say:
This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.[1 Tim 2:3-4]

 

[earl40]

the devil believes god’s exhistance

Yes the devil believes “God is one” also but he is a demon and you are not. James is not making the same jump in logic you did here BTW.

The content of his (the devils) faith? From the context it is that there is one God. Well, even many unbelievers (i.e. non-christians) profess monotheism but they do not profess Jesus as Messiah or crucified Saviour and Lord. I know this they (the demons) have faith that they will be judge and sent to hell in the future.

If you wish try this in James 2:19 "You believe that Jesus lived,died, and rose from the dead for you, you do well. Even the demons believe–and shudder!

You can see above by changing His word just above you jump in logic just does not work.

 

[earl40]

Firstly, the Catholic understanding of Romans, indeed the whole of Scripture, isn’t dependent on forming a theological construct and then shoehorning Bible verses into it. Some do that in order to make Scripture support what they want to think. That’s poor exegesis. The proper way to view Scripture is according to the intention of the author of the book. So, what is Paul’s intention here?

The key verse is: [8] This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants.

Paul is telling us that being a physical descendant of Israel was never enough to please God and he goes on to give his readers examples that make his point.

Paul does not say that God loved Jacob and hated Esau without knowing them, which is what is implied by saying “before their birth”. God knows each of us through and through from all eternity. Does he prevent people from being born if they aren’t going to do as he wills? No. Why? Because he has left conceiving and birthing our young up to us. He simply knows, not determines, who will do what/will conform to his will and who won’t. He didn’t make Esau sell his birthright to Jacob. Esau made that decision and God held him to it.

God makes good comes from evil. He uses our bad decisions and flaws and fallen nature to bring about his will even though he would much rather we didn’t sin. Because he does this doesn’t mean he causes men to sin. That is what Paul is saying, as I understand it.

also…

If Paul meant that God specially creates people for damnation, then Paul could not also say:
This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.[1 Tim 2:3-4]

Your description of Romans 9 would never elicit a response that Paul brings up in verses 20-23…Would it?

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus?

21 Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?

22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction:

23 and that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory,

 

[MichaelHowling]

This is Paul saying “what if” because God indeed has the power to do that. But these verses do not say God creates people for the purpose of sending them to hell or that He deprives them of any grace to get to heaven.

The analogy in this chapter is of “clay.” The potter has control over clay because it is malleable, soft. But what else does Scripture tell us? We are not to harden our hearts. We are to thus remain like the clay God wants to mold, and if we let Him, He will lead us to His eternal kingdom.

In the Old Testament, if you follow the story of Pharoah in Exodus, it seems like half the time the text says “Pharoah hardened his heart” and the other half the time it says “The Lord hardened Pharoah’s heart.” So you see how the concepts can be seen interchangeably? If Pharoah hardens his heart, God lets him (and will still bring about his will through Pharoah’s decision) so in another sense God being sovereign is said to “harden Pharoah’s heart.” And you remember in Romans 9:18 it says God hardens who He wants to harden. In the same way, when Paul says God could create a vessel of wrath, it does not mean the person spoken of would not have the free will to choose God. And it would still make sense to say God wills to harden those who reject Him.

St. John Chrysostom, writing around the 4th century, interpreted the verses in question this way:
Here it is not to do away with free-will that he says this, but to show, up to what point we ought to obey God. For in respect of calling God to account, we ought to be as little disposed to it as the clay is…And when he does go on to say, Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? do not suppose that this is said by Paul as an account of the creation, nor as implying a necessity over the will, but to illustrate the sovereignty and difference of dispensations; for if we do not take it in this way, various incongruities will follow, for if here he were speaking about the will, and those who are good and those not so, He will be Himself the Maker of these, and man will be free from all responsibility. And at this rate, Paul will also be shown to be at variance with himself, as he always bestows chief honor upon free choice. There is nothing else then which he here wishes to do, save to persuade the hearer to yield entirely to God, and at no time to call Him to account for anything whatever. For as the potter (he says) of the same lump makes what he pleases, and no one forbids it; thus also when God, of the same race of men, punishes some, and honors others, be not thou curious nor meddlesome herein, but worship only, and imitate the clay.

Also, we need to consider the analogy of the potter & clay with its use in Scripture. Consider the following Old Testament passage bearing very close resemblance to Romans 9.
Jeremiah 18:5-10 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.
You see how God tells us that the kind of potter He is relates to the obedience of the “clay” in question. He does not forge persons to do evil without ever giving them the grace to turn to Him. Rather God chooses to form the obedient into good vessels but leaves the disobedient to their own wills. Either way, He is totally in charge because as the giver of life, He can have any reason to build up or destroy any one He wants. He simply chooses to build up those who join Him in love.

The part about Jacob and Esau can be understood the same way. First of all, God “so loved the world that He sent His Son,” not “God loved the world, except for Esau and this guy and that guy…” So when we see the Scriptural writer use the language of “God hated,” we must understand that he is anthropomorphizing God that we might come to an understanding in human terms. Romans 8, just a few verses earlier, speaks of God’s “foreknowledge.” That does not mean He “hated” Esau such that He never gave Esau the grace to choose God. It means rather that in some sense, God knew Esau would not live according to God’s will without Esau’s free will being compromised.

 

[earl40]

Firstly, the Catholic understanding of Romans, indeed the whole of Scripture, isn’t dependent on forming a theological construct and then shoehorning Bible verses into it.[1 Tim 2:3-4]

BTW I had a construct from 4th grade on that God gets what ever He wants. Worked well while I was a “RC” and now that I am a “rabid” protestant it has shown me that scripture alone is the final and ultimate authority.

 

[earl40]

This is Paul saying “what if” because God indeed has the power to do that. But these verses do not say God creates people for the purpose of sending them to hell or that He deprives them of any grace to get to heaven.

The analogy in this chapter is of “clay.” The potter has control over clay because it is malleable, soft. But what else does Scripture tell us? We are not to harden our hearts. We are to thus remain like the clay God wants to mold, and if we let Him, He will lead us to His eternal kingdom.

In the Old Testament, if you follow the story of Pharoah in Exodus, it seems like half the time the text says “Pharoah hardened his heart” and the other half the time it says “The Lord hardened Pharoah’s heart.” So you see how the concepts can be seen interchangeably? If Pharoah hardens his heart, God lets him (and will still bring about his will through Pharoah’s decision) so in another sense God being sovereign is said to “harden Pharoah’s heart.” And you remember in Romans 9:18 it says God hardens who He wants to harden. In the same way, when Paul says God could create a vessel of wrath, it does not mean the person spoken of would not have the free will to choose God. And it would still make sense to say God wills to harden those who reject Him.

St. John Chrysostom, writing around the 4th century, interpreted the verses in question this way:
Here it is not to do away with free-will that he says this, but to show, up to what point we ought to obey God. For in respect of calling God to account, we ought to be as little disposed to it as the clay is…And when he does go on to say, Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? do not suppose that this is said by Paul as an account of the creation, nor as implying a necessity over the will, but to illustrate the sovereignty and difference of dispensations; for if we do not take it in this way, various incongruities will follow, for if here he were speaking about the will, and those who are good and those not so, He will be Himself the Maker of these, and man will be free from all responsibility. And at this rate, Paul will also be shown to be at variance with himself, as he always bestows chief honor upon free choice. There is nothing else then which he here wishes to do, save to persuade the hearer to yield entirely to God, and at no time to call Him to account for anything whatever. For as the potter (he says) of the same lump makes what he pleases, and no one forbids it; thus also when God, of the same race of men, punishes some, and honors others, be not thou curious nor meddlesome herein, but worship only, and imitate the clay.

Also, we need to consider the analogy of the potter & clay with its use in Scripture. Consider the following Old Testament passage bearing very close resemblance to Romans 9.
Jeremiah 18:5-10 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.
You see how God tells us that the kind of potter He is relates to the obedience of the “clay” in question. He does not forge persons to do evil without ever giving them the grace to turn to Him. Rather God chooses to form the obedient into good vessels but leaves the disobedient to their own wills. Either way, He is totally in charge because as the giver of life, He can have any reason to build up or destroy any one He wants. He simply chooses to build up those who join Him in love.

The part about Jacob and Esau can be understood the same way. First of all, God “so loved the world that He sent His Son,” not “God loved the world, except for Esau and this guy and that guy…” So when we see the Scriptural writer use the language of “God hated,” we must understand that he is anthropomorphizing God that we might come to an understanding in human terms. Romans 8, just a few verses earlier, speaks of God’s “foreknowledge.” That does not mean He “hated” Esau such that He never gave Esau the grace to choose God. It means rather that in some sense, God knew Esau would not live according to God’s will without Esau’s free will being compromised.

Romans 9:20-23 TOTALLY defies your explanation.

 

[MichaelHowling]

No sir! It dosent.

and where do you get that the bible is the ultimate and final authoritative word ?

Who did Jesus leave authority to ?

As He was going up into Heaven He told His apostles (leaders of His church) " Go therefore and teach all nations…"

That’s the authority.

The book ITSELF did not fall from the sky claiming the power you say it has! Nor did Christ EVER mention the book or even ask for one to be put together! THE CHURCH ACTUALLY PUT IT TOGETHER! Authority was given to the church sir ! And it’s interpretation was given to those who put it together…the church…its her book.

by using your logic it is very easy to see why there are soooo many christian denomenations…everyone else has their own ideas on what passages mean!

 

[MichaelHowling]

“go therefore and teach all nations”

“he who hears you hears me”

"you are the rock on which i will build my church! "

"and he breathed on them and said recieve the holy spirit! whose sins YOU forgive are forgiven them and whose sins YOU retain are retained’

authority authority authority…to the apostles…not a book! A book didnt even get put together until a few hundred years later.