If the elect are saved, and if the rest are damned . .

  • Thread starter Thread starter tabcom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by tabcom
…If man has free-will to accept God, then man’s free-will trumps God’s Will.
Not if the existence of Man’s free will is contigent upon it being God’s Will that Man have free will.
**I agree with this statement, in so much as, Genesis 2:16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;”

Adam’s ability to choose was subject to only the trees that God had predestinated Adam to eat from. In other words, God pre-bound Adam within the Light (see Rom 8:29) or garden, and told him he was free to eat of any tree within the garden.**
Your presentation of predestination and free will should preclude you from participating in any discussions. There simply is no point. But you do participate and actions speak louder than words…
If this was intended as fatelistic wordplay . . . I’m mildly amused.
 
Tabcom…
You are reading into whats not there.
Again… predestined means meant for… it does not mean meant for and a guarantee of getting.

You are reading into the Catholic explanation your definition.

Look at the document you provided from a different view point, not Calvin eyes. (even if you don’t cal yourself Calvin, it is calvinesque)

There is a difference between elect, and predestination. You seem to combine. As mentioned Predestined means meant for something. Doesn’t mean you get it, just that it was meant for you.
Per the Bible, All men, women and children have been predestined from before creation for eternal life. ALL men, thats in the bible. Now, an Elect is someone that is someone that is in Christ (IE a believer) That being said, just like those that are cut from the vine after being grafted in, you can loose that election.

God said, if you follow him, you are in the light, and you may have eternal life.
In other words, if you follow him, you will be destined to eternal life.

A second way to look at it is saying god decided before hand that if you follow him, you will have eternal life.
This is very true…

It also says if you do not follow him you are meant for hell.

it does not say that no matter what, this person will go to heaven, and no matter what, this person will go to hell.

It does say that no matter what, those that follow him will go to heaven, and those that do not will go to hell. Subtle but HUGE difference.

On your point about Paul teaching this. This is your understanding of those verses Paul wrote, and therefore, do not qualify. My understanding of predestination (as has been defined) is different than yours. So, what I need from you is a Jewish document or teaching on Jewish things that dictates that Jews believe in Predestination. Again, though the bible is above, we are to disagree on what those verses mean, so you will need to look further.

Finanally, If predestination as you espouse is true, then I have a question for you to consider. There are countless places in the world that know nothing of Christ. Did God Predestine only those in the Western, Christian world? Are there no Predestined Souls in tribal regions of Africa? Australia? Asia? Arabia?..

We do you believe predestination as you espouse is true if there are plenty of regions world wide that know nothing of Christ?

May you be blessed in your journey

IN Christ
The Church generally uses the term “elect” for those who are predestined to glory (i.e. the Church Triumphant). The number of the elect is immutably fixed and thus they cannot be lost.

God Bless,
Michael
 
Mike…
I am not above being corrected…

If my definition of elect does not match with the churches, then I am in error…

do you have a quick link for me so that I can get a better understanding?

And with that… Tabcomb…

Though I will resign from this to better understand what the church teaches, my questions still hold value, and ask that you still address each of them, and not ignore simply because i am doing further research.

In Christ
 
Mike…
I am not above being corrected…

If my definition of elect does not match with the churches, then I am in error…

do you have a quick link for me so that I can get a better understanding?

And with that… Tabcomb…

Though I will resign from this to better understand what the church teaches, my questions still hold value, and ask that you still address each of them, and not ignore simply because i am doing further research.

In Christ
Sure! I provided these links earlier, but I’ll post them again:

thecatholicfaith.com/Teachings/predestination.htm

The following link is primarily on Thomism, but touches on Molinism

thesumma.info/predestination/predestination4.php

These links are on Molinism

newadvent.org/cathen/10437a.htm

nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/molinism.htm

This one is wikipedia’s explanation of Molinism:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molinism

I hope this helps. This is a complicated topic. Catholics need to undertand the Catholic Church’s teachings on predestination before engaging in a discussion with Calvinists. I’ve noticed while reading this thread and the “Golden Chain” one that there is some confusion on what the Catholic Church teaches and what “the elect” means. This will only lead to an unfruitful dialogue with our Calvinist brothers and sisters. We are not Arminians. Arminianism arose in Protestant circles and is grounded in principles that are distinctly Protestant. In fact, I personally believe that Arminianism tends to depreciate God’s sovereignty. I may be wrong on that. However, we have our own theology on predestination that upholds the sovereignty of God while not denying the freedom of the will.

God Bless,
Michael
 
ok . . but when it comes to ‘simple logic’ regarding God, if a statement is scripturally inaccurated, it must be rejected.

ok.
**No. predestination is not the method of salvation. Repentence is.**Predestined is associated with the believer NOT with the vessels of wrath.
Im’ still waiting for a reply to post #46. reprinted here . . .

What I don’t understand, and I ask with complete humility is, 'how can anyone believe in (a person’s ability to accept God) after reading John 1:13?'

Which were born, NOT of blood, NOR of the WILL of the flesh, NOR of the will of man, but of God.
Because salvation is BY GRACE but THROUGH FAITH. It is not the decision PER SE which accomplishes being born again, but that act of faith operating within the framework of GODS GRACE.
Apart from God’s grace a decision accomplishes nothing with respect to salvation.
THere is your answer. Simple, clear and to the point without dodging to bible verses.
 
Please explain to me how John 1:12 is a free-will verse?
Its not. It is simply saying one must be born of the spirit, not of the flesh. It doesn’t address free will and does not exclude the fact that the choices we make within the context of God’s grace
have real, eternal consequences*.*
 
Predestinate is the Greek word Pro’orizo. Pro’orizo means to prebound or predetermine boundary lines in advance. Pro’orizo is a construction of the prefix pro (our prefix “pre”, meaning before) and the Greek word ‘Orizo – to bound or to mark out a boundary, to appoint, decree, specify, declare, determine, limit, ordain

The small mark ‘ before the word ‘Orizo is called a diacritical mark. It has an “h” sound. The word ‘orizo is written “Horizo” and pronounced, “Horidzo”( the “z” is pronounced “dz” in the Greek). This word looks similar to our word “Horizon”. That is because it is exactly our word horizon.

The horizon was a very familiar boundary line to Jewish mind. It was the division or the boundary of light (day) and darkness (night).

Jesus said, “Ye are the light of the world.” (Matt. 5:14). Light is equated with Truth throughout scripture.

Paul said, “Ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord, walk as children of light. – have no fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness” (Eph. 5:8,11).

Again, Paul said, “Be ye not unequally yoked with unbelievers – what communion hath light with darkness?” (II Cor. 6:14).

Unbelievers are equated as living in darkness, therefore believers are equated with light – light is always equivalent to Truth.

We are commanded to walk in the light.
Im trying to follow you, but you never got around to saying EXACTLY what predestination specifically means. It comes from from boundary - fine.
Does it mean the predestined can’t NOT walk in the light?
 
I posted this in the Golden Chain thread, but I think I need to post it here as well:

I think the relationship between free will and predestination or free will and grace is a very complex issue. The elect will infallibly be saved. But how does God accomplish that without destroying the freedom of the will? What about the reprobate? Does God ever give them the opportunity (i.e. sufficient grace) to repent and turn to Him? These are questions theologians for hundreds of years have attempted to answer. Let’s look at the following verse:

Isaiah 5:1-7

**1Now will I sing to my wellbeloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard. My wellbeloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill:
2And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. 3And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.
4What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?
5And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down:
6And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned, nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.
7For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry. **

The vineyard is the House of Israel. God asserts that he did everything possible for His vineyard in order for it to produce righteousness. He even asks, “What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?” The question clearly implies that God did everything possible for His vineyard, and yet it did not bear the fruit He wanted. Now we all know that righteous living must be preceded by repentance and repentance must be preceded by grace. So if God did not provide sufficient grace in order for His people to bear fruit in righteousness, than there was something He could have done that he did not do. But the question in verse 4 and the metaphor in verses 2 clearly implies that God did everything needed in order for His people to bear righteous fruit and hence God must have provided sufficient grace. If God did His part, why wasn’t this grace efficacious? Another factor must have come into play, the human will. This demonstrates 3 points:

1)That grace is not irresistable, particularly in the case of the reprobate.

2)God takes into account the human will in accomplishing His plan of salvation. Otherwise, His vineyard would have born fruit, partcularly since He wanted it to bear fruit and did the work to accomplish it (i.e. provided sufficient grace).
  1. Sufficient grace is also offered to the reprobate and there is the possibility of genuine acceptance, since a genuine and sincere offer can only be such if it can be accepted. I cannot sincerely offer a starving person tied to a chair food if I at least do not make an attempt to untie him. If I do not untie him and then say he rejected the food I offered, my offer was not genuine or sincere.
God Bless,
Michael
 
I posted this in the Golden Chain thread, but I think I need to post it here as well:

I think the relationship between free will and predestination or free will and grace is a very complex issue. The elect will infallibly be saved. But how does God accomplish that without destroying the freedom of the will? What about the reprobate? Does God ever give them the opportunity (i.e. sufficient grace) to repent and turn to Him? These are questions theologians for hundreds of years have attempted to answer. Let’s look at the following verse:

Isaiah 5:1-7

**1Now will I sing to my wellbeloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard. My wellbeloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill:
2And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. 3And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.
4What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?
5And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down:
6And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned, nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.
7For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry. **

The vineyard is the House of Israel. God asserts that he did everything possible for His vineyard in order for it to produce righteousness. He even asks, “What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?” The question clearly implies that God did everything possible for His vineyard, and yet it did not bear the fruit He wanted. Now we all know that righteous living must be preceded by repentance and repentance must be preceded by grace. So if God did not provide sufficient grace in order for His people to bear fruit in righteousness, than there was something He could have done that he did not do. But the question in verse 4 and the metaphor in verses 2 clearly implies that God did everything needed in order for His people to bear righteous fruit and hence God must have provided sufficient grace. If God did His part, why wasn’t this grace efficacious? Another factor must have come into play, the human will. This demonstrates 3 points:

1)That grace is not irresistable, particularly in the case of the reprobate.

2)God takes into account the human will in accomplishing His plan of salvation. Otherwise, His vineyard would have born fruit, partcularly since He wanted it to bear fruit and did the work to accomplish it (i.e. provided sufficient grace).
  1. Sufficient grace is also offered to the reprobate and there is the possibility of genuine acceptance, since a genuine and sincere offer can only be such if it can be accepted. I cannot sincerely offer a starving person tied to a chair food if I at least do not make an attempt to untie him. If I do not untie him and then say he rejected the food I offered, my offer was not genuine or sincere.
God Bless,
Michael
 
Does it mean the predestined can’t NOT walk in the light?
**No.

The predestinated can turn away from the Truth (light) and get involve in sin (darkness). But God is going to have to beat His elect inorder for them to repent (turn) from the darkness and return to the light. **
 
**No.

The predestinated can turn away from the Truth (light) and get involve in sin (darkness). But God is going to have to beat His elect inorder for them to repent (turn) from the darkness and return to the light. **
At times you sound like a Calvinist. Sometimes you sound like a Thomist Catholic. Other times you sound like plain old tabcom. 😃 I would love to engage in a discussion with you if I understood what you believe.

God bless,
Michael
 
At times you sound like a Calvinist. Sometimes you sound like a Thomist Catholic. Other times you sound like plain old tabcom. 😃 I would love to engage in a discussion with you if I understood what you believe.

God bless,
Michael
**I like that. Thanks. :tiphat:
I’ve been trying my darnest to get what I believe out there. The difficulty is the language bearer – as to what does a word mean.

btw, I like your post on Isaiah 5:1-7.
**
 
Per the Bible, All men, women and children have been predestined from before creation for eternal life. ALL men, thats in the bible.
**All does not mean every man, woman, child that ever lived.

I’m going to use the English translation from the original Greek text. Available at: scripture4all.org/

1 Tim 2:1-4

I exhort therefore, that, first of ALL, supplications, prayers, intercessions, (and) giving of thanks, be made for ALL men;

For kings, and {for} ALL that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in ALL godliness and honesty.

For this {is} good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior:

Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Using a parsing guide:

1st All: Genitive, Plural, Neuter Gender
2nd All: Genitive, Plural, Masc. Gender
3rd All: Genitive, Plural, Masc. Gender
4th All: Dative, Singular, Fem. Gender
5th All: Accusative, Plural, Masc. Gender

Neuter Gender:
Neither masculine nor feminine in gender.

Genitive Case:
Of, relating to, or being the grammatical case expressing possession, measurement, or source.

Dative Case:
Of, relating to, or being the grammatical case that marks the recipient of action, that often indicates the indirect object of the verb, and that can be used with prepositions or other function words corresponding in meaning to English to and for.

Accusative Case:
Of, relating to, or being the grammatical case that is the direct object of a verb or the object of certain prepositions.

Within these four verses, there are four different Greek words that have been ambiguously translated into the English word ‘all’.

:juggle: How are you going to make sense of that?

Let’s look at Romans 4:16 - For this reason {it is} by faith, in order that {it may be} in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all,

Those of the Law = Jews by birthright.
Paul is now proclaiming that the ‘all’ is extended to those that of the faith of Abraham, who were the gentiles. It is this very point that separates Jews from Christians today.**
God said, if you follow him, you are in the light, and you may have eternal life. In other words, if you follow him, you will be destined to eternal life.
**Mt 4:19 - And (Jesus) *said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.”
Jesus was not asking Simon Peter and his brother Andrew, ‘would you like to accept me as your personal savior?’. He was commanding them 'FOLLOW ME!" **
what I need from you is a Jewish document or teaching on Jewish things that dictates that Jews believe in Predestination.
**I’ve tried to answer this question earlier. I’ll attempt to do so again. Was not Paul a Jew? Yes. He was an accomplice when the Jews stoned Stephen to death. Was he not teaching when he wrote to the Romans? Yes. From where would he have learned the Doctrine of Predestination? He cites Genesis when he says God loved Jacob (a jew ) and hated esau while they were still in the belly of Rebekah (a jew) . Is not that Jewish enough for you? **
Are there no Predestined Souls in tribal regions of Africa? Australia? Asia? Arabia?..
**That is none of my business. Jesus says ‘I am the way’ He didn’t say, ‘I am a way’ If He wants someone saved in one of those regions, it will be done. **
 
**One more time . . . ‘all’ does not mean every man, woman, child that ever lived . . .

When Ananias tells Paul “You will be his witness to all (pantas) men of what you have seen and heard”(Acts 22:15), was it Paul’s duty to speak personally to each and every human being? The idea being expressed is that the gentiles shall share in the Spirit along side the jews. The all (pantas) is clearified in Acts 22:21 and 1 Tim 2:7.

Acts 22:21
“Then the Lord said to me, 'Go; I will send you far away to the Gentiles.”

1 Tim 2:7
And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.**
 
**The predestinated can turn away from the Truth (light) and get involve in sin (darkness). **

Good. When they do so, is it their will or God’s will? One word answer please! :yup:
40.png
tabcom:
**But God is going to have to beat His elect inorder for them to repent (turn) from the darkness and return to the light. **

Is it possible for the elect NOT to repent from the darkness?
 
You agree that predestination does not guarantee the end of the one predestined?
**Yes.

With respects to the Calvinist doctrine of ‘once you are saved, you are always saved’, or in other words, guaranteed salvation – the bible, and RCC Doctrine does not teach that.**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top