If you still think the The Prodigal Son is about a Christian falling from grace and then repenting, I would reccomend you to read Tertullian’s excellent exegesis of it in Chapter 8, and particularly Chapter 9 of his work On Modesty. He explains it much better than I can.
That was interesting. So in effect, he describes the prodigal son as someone who as never believed in God, but comes to his senses and is reconciled to him. the other brother is a Christian.
Ethan, it would seem that you and our good Tertullian have totally ignored the reason Jesus even gave these parables.
Here is a New Advent link on it. It is catholic so it should be biased with respect to the RCC: There are two links both should be read.
Pelagius, on the other hand, taught that each man is created free just as Adam was and that each man must choose whether he will serve God or the devil. All men, contended Pelagius, are not sinners because Adam sinned, but because each man himself has violated God's law. Pelagius argued that when God extended the plan of salvation, it is for all who will obey, not just a few whom God arbitrarily chose, totally independently of themselves. Each man may cooperate with God and be saved through his faith and obedience to God's will.
Whoa!!!
you’re going down the road of pacing kicking stones and muttering to yourself like all theologians before you.!!!Well Tertullian’s credibility is somewhat tainted by the fact that he seems to have been excommunicated by the Church (or at least left it) in 212AD. In any case, his argument is that the prodigal son must not have been a baptized Christian, because then this parable would indicate that a baptized Chrisian was free to do evil and then return to the fold unscathed. He didn’t like that message because it allowed people to think that their actions in life didn’t matter because they could always return. He prefered instead that the prodigal son was a "heathen, who saw the light. However, it is clear that the Catholic church teaches that with true repentance and a valid confession, such as given by the Prodigal son in this example, sinners can be accepted back into the church and can achieve eternal life. For this reason, I would say that Tertuillian is not correct in his interpretation.
But, that doesn’t answer the question. I’d like them in your words (You’re so much easier to understand that Augustine and Martin Luther).Whoa!!!
Settle down. Everything is under control. Just trust in God.
I recommend: Augustine’s works. The Shorter Summa by Aquinas. The Bondage of the will by Martin Luther. I wouldn’t tackle the instittues of the Christian religion by John Calvin yet. But there are some good short books over tulip (5 Point Calvinism) that are helpful.
God is great and the Bible is a wonderful gift to us.
But I wouldn’t say that’s what the parable is meant to teach. Just as God’s Grace is a gift undeserved, maybe so is God’s forgiveness? By this I mean, there is nothing we can do to earn God’s forgiveness should we repent.
We do have free will and there is merit when we use it properly. Does it mean God owes it to us, No. We have no “rights” before God. He afterall created us and without him, we are nothing. But he has told us he will reward our righteousness out of his love and mercy. He has also told us that he will punish those that do not love God and neighbor.
It’s apparent that nothing the son did, prodigalizing, consorting with Gentiles, sleeping with the pigs (!) separated him from his father’s love. And, it’s also apparent that during all this he never quit being a member of the family, never quit being his father’s son. However, the important thing to note is that all this did him no good while he was sleeping with the pigs.
At first blush, it does look like that, doesn’t it? Maybe someone more versed in Calvinism and Augustinianism could help to clarify just what is implied by the doctrine of Predestination? Is it as cut and dry as it appears to most? Is it that God chooses some and leaves others in a state of reprobation? Is that what Paul means when he says that God will have mercy on whom he has mercy? If I am mistaken about the doctrine of Predestination, please let me know. I am open to correction. This is a forum for dialogue. And one cannot engage in true dialogue if they are not willing to admit that they are wrong. Thank you.
The official Catholic view is that some are predestined for heaven but that no one is predestined to Hell. (Being predestined to Hell is also called double predestination). God would like all to be saved and provides sufficient grace for that to happen but we have to cooperate in our salvation through faith and acts of Good works (love God and Love your Neighbor). The Catholic Church teaches that no one can be saved without God’s grace and that God also knows who will be saved because he is omniscient and his plan for salvation will occur because he is omnipotent. However, he does allow us to choose our destiny through our faith and action because of his love and respect for human dignity. Both of these points must be true in Catholic theology. However, the mechanism that allows them to be true simultaneously has been debated since the 1600s without resolution between the Thomists (who emphasize the predestination aspects associated with God’s Grace and that man was made to use his free will in a way that meets God’s plans) and the Molinist, (who emphasize the importance of Man’s free will, saying essentially that God knows how we will use our free will and planned accordingly). In any case, both systems were devised to show how we could have free will while at the same time, God’s plans remain in effect.
All I can say to that is “AMEN”!
Alright guys. This is a little off topic but it’s close enough that it warrants conversation because the faulty explaination of OSAS really ties in to this. So, here goes.It is an overstep or at the very least an oversimplification to say that Calvin and Augustine had the same positions on salvation theology. If Calvin had been in concert with the Catholic Church on this, he never would have left. Lets explore some of the nuances between Catholic thought and TULIP also address your biblical proofs,
This is the five points of Calvinism. (Note: Calvinism is all based on an interpretation of scripture and nothing but scripture, so if you ever do read the lengthy institutes it’s all written to explain scripture, so is ths…and Calvin basically just came to the same conclusions about pre-destination as Augustine did. They disagreed in many other areas however. But Augustine would have subscribed to TULIP which is what I am about to show.
Catholics do not believe that man is totally depraved. In fact, you can observe athiests doing acts of charity. Catholics DO believe that man can not be saved without the Grace of God and the sacrifice of Christ to reconcile us to God. But man has free will and the capability of doing good or evil based on that. This is what Calvin denies. As for Mark 7:21-23, the context of this passage is discussing the Jewish dietary laws. Jesus is saying that sin doesn’t come from what you ingest, but from what you put out from your heart. He is not saying that everything man is capable of is evil. To read it your way is to simply bend words to make them say what you want. This is a fabrication, not the truth.
This is to deny that man’s Free will is meaningful and says that nothing you do in life matters. This is counter to the entire Gospel message, where Jesus expounds that to gain internal life, you must love god and Love Neighbor. He also, in Mt 25: 31-46, distinguishes between the righteous and the condemned by the works of charity they do. This more than implies merit is required. This is not to say man can merit salvation on his own, he can’t. Since everything comes from God, we can’t earn anything, but he can and will REWARD us for our love. While we Catholics would agree that God predestines us through his Grace, we also understand that we must cooperate with those Graces to be saved. Remember, in Hebrews 2:18, we are told
. If our salvation was unconditional, there would be no test to endure.
We agree that there is limited atonement, some are indeed condemned to Hell. But this is because they failed to love God and neighbor, not because God condemned them to hell from their birth. We believe that God gives everyone the necessary grace to be saved. We must cooperate with that Grace through Faith and works to gain eternal life.
If God wants us to be saved, of course we will be. But we do have free will and God will not coerce us to do something we don’t want to do, out of his love and mercy.
We can agree that God will give the necessary Grace for salvation to those that are to be saved. However. It can be God has made certain people in a way that enables them to do so. It can also be said that God can motivate them through conscience to persevere as well. The exact mechanism of final perseverence is unknowable. , we still need to cooperate with this. Furthermore, we must stay true to the faith to death to have been said to persevere. Finally, although God knows whether we will be saved through his omniscience, WE do NOT know our status until the final judgement. (again see Matt 25: 31-46). This is the great danger of OSAS as often used in the Protestant community (maybe not yours). many are led to believe that all they need to do is have faith and that none of their subsequent actions matter, because their salvation is assured. This, ironically, can lead to complacency , loss of perseverence, and ultimately loss of salvation. you can argue, correctly perhaps, that this loss was predestined in the makeup of these people, but in the end, whether it was predestined or not, we have to perform or we perish…
No problem. I’m going to do the same in my response. Protestants like yourself have a very dim view of man. Its one thing to give God credit, as the maker of all things. Its another to deny man’s dignity or the fact that man was created in the image and likeness of God. Why do you think that God would create man to be so inherently evil? Does that make sense to you? Remember in Genesis, when everything that was created was good? The fact is, man did fall from Grace with original sin and we required Jesus’s paschal sacrifice to be reconciled to God. However, the original sin did not transform us into evil.
I agree wholeheartely with this statement. Man needs God’s aid. If you read your own statement, you will see that with God’s help, he can do good works that can be rewarded with eternal life. using the same free will, he can also fail to do good works and be condemned. Just as described in matt 25: 31-46. How do you address Jesus’s description of what happens at the last judgement otherwise.
You read too much into this reading. Sure evil CAN come from man’s heart. But it doesn’t say that evil is the only thing that the human heart is capable of, does it?
This is simply not true. The Pelagian thought was that we can achieve heaven, solely through our own works and without the Aid of God. The Calvanist view (which you espouse) is that our works are inconsequential in salvation and everything comes form God. The Catholic position is between the two. We believe that without God there is no salvation, to be sure. But we also beleive that man has responsibility (albiet secondarily) for his own salvation as well. If this was not true, why would Jesus have wasted so much time preaching love and morality in his time on earth. Why didn’t he just say (as you propose): Believe in God , nothing more is required, and God will give you eternal life. Instead, when asked by the rich man what was required for eternal life in Matt 19, he clearly said, “follow the commandments”. (and to be perfect, give away all your possessions and follow me)… Later, in Matt 22, he summarized the commandment as " love God and Love your neighbor as yourself". If he wasn’t serious about this, why did he say it.
Exactly right. And would he be just if he declared us righteous, when we are in fact , we are totally depraved and worth of hell? No. In your scenario, he would merely be merciful. In fact, a just God would require us to actually be righteous in order to achieve eternal life. And what do we need to do to actually be righteous? have faith only? No, that would be just words and words justify no one. As St. Paul said in Corinthians13, If you have faith enough to move mountains but don’t have love, you are nothing. And St. James (In chapter 2) says unequivocally, “faith without works is dead.”. In the Matt 25:31-46 sequence, Jesus describes the righteous as having taken care of the least of his brothers, and condemns the others for not having done so. So a just God, as you suggest, requires the saved to be righteous, and being righteous requires works of love.
Unfortunately, this attitude will not save you . This is simply complacency and is not demostrating final perseverance. You think you have done enough by simply believing these are just words. You need to demonstrate this faith with action. Jesus warned you in Matthew 7:21-23:
. Clearly to Jesus, words are not enough. You need to do the will of his father.
