Protestants: Could you please do us all a favor??

  • Thread starter Thread starter distracted
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
While the church remained very dogmatic (and used fear and frightening imagery to compel obedience) very few Christians believed that it was beyond anyone’s capacity to have faith. Indeed the idea of punishing dissenters is premised on the idea that everyone is capable of faith – though of course the bible does not say this. The bible very clearly states that faith is a gift from god; and it’s not granted universally.
The Bible very clearly states that Jesus died as a ransom for all men and that God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth because God is Love. [1 Timothy 2:3-7, 1 John 4:8] Since He desires this, then He makes it possible. Otherwise He cannot be God.

However, not all men are saved. This is because they use their own free wills to thwart God’s Salvation Plan.

Predestination is only used in a positive sense in Scripture, never a negative. Persons are predestined because of God’s foreknowledge. They are not predestined arbitrarily by a vindictive God. [1 Peter 1:2, Romans 8:29] He judges all of us without partiality. Our own actions condemn us, if we are to be condemned. [Titus 3:10-11, John 3:18, John 3:17, Matthew 12:37]

So, before we were born, God saw us and all of our “works” and He predestined those who would fear Him and work righteousness. This is the only criteria which He chose to judge us. [1 Peter 1:16-17, Acts 10:34-35]

For more on Free Will: members.cox.net/studyhisword/FreeWill.pdf

Yes, God gives some persons more faith than others, but He gives every person enough faith in order to be saved. [Hebrews 11:6, Romans 10:17]

A person can reject Christ at any point during his life and unless he repents and confesses before death, he will not inherit eternal life.

Whether persons believe in heaven and hell or not will not change their realities.
 
As someone who has walked away from my faith – I suppose I don’t have much credibility on this issue; but I feel compelled to comment anyway (and you folks can take it for what its worth I suppose).

When I was a believer I was raised Roman Catholic, and throughout most of my life I was a farily good Catholic (though far from perfect). I was baptized, had my first communion, confirmation, served as an alter boy, went to Catholic school as a child, and was involved with the church in many other ways.

That being said in my first year of college (as an undergrad) I read some John Calvin & became so enthralled by his work I subsequently read most of his Institutes; along with substantial study of St. Augustine. During this time I also studied scripture in depth. I read the bible so many times I can still cite scripture today (over ten years later) from memory. I had to admit to myself Calvin interpreted scripture more accurately then perhaps any other theologian in history (maybe with the exception of Augustine). I continued my studies – reading Aquinas, Wesley, Luther, Spurgeon, and many others. To this day I would always side with Calvin with regard to scriptural interpretation.

The problem is very few Christians throughout history shared Calvin’s view. There’s always been a disconnect between intellectual theologians and the laity. When you read the apostolic fathers (Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp) you can’t ignore the fact that predestination was an immensely important reality for them. Indeed their letters in many cases almost mirrored the Pauline epistles (and at least I get the impression they would have very clearly sided with Augustine & Calvin on predestination and grace). But then turn to early apologists, most notably Justin Martyr; and a very different picture begins to emerge. Notwithstanding the opinion of a minority of theologians IMO Martyr would have almost certainly sided with theologians like Jacob Arminius and John Wesley.

Then came Aquinas followed by Luis Molina – who both remain immensely influential (particularly in Roman Catholic circles; but at least in the case of Molina also in Arminian protestant circles – particularly among theologians like William Lane Craig). The point of all my dribble is that the bible has never amenable to uniform interpretation. Even within the CC there exists different orders who hold different soteriological perspectives (i.e. contrast the Jesuits with the Benedictines); and of course the same holds true with protestants (indeed to a much higher degree).

The first Christians were waiting for the world to end. They thought the end would come any day; much like protestants sects that began to emerge at the turn of the century like the Jehovah Witnesses. You can even see hints of the apostles trying to dispel the notion that Christians should be in the business of trying to predict when the end will come. Then as the church began to institutionalize it began to plan for the long term (and the very apocalyptic early view eventually waned). While the church remained very dogmatic (and used fear and frightening imagery to compel obedience) very few Christians believed that it was beyond anyone’s capacity to have faith. Indeed the idea of punishing dissenters is premised on the idea that everyone is capable of faith – though of course the bible does not say this. The bible very clearly states that faith is a gift from god; and it’s not granted universally.

The CC of course holds tradition has authority equal that of scripture. It has promulgated several avenues to create doctrine (i.e. papal infallibility, sacred & ordinary magesterium, episcopal councils, etc.). It has taken the defacto view that where they believe scripture isn’t clear on its face – they may promulgate doctrine to fill in the gaps. This has resulted in a very Arminian outlook among the majority of Catholics (both Eastern and Roman Rite). Indeed Arminian soteriology is also the majority view within protestantism. There’s good reason for this – Arminian soteriology is perceived as the kinder view. It portrays in the mind of most a more loving god than Calvinism does. Even Calvin himself described double predestination as the “horrible decree.” Well, no one wants a god who makes horrible decrees – notwithstanding this is exactly what the bible states.

Personally I think it’s great that this sort of theological perspective emerged; because it has produced some really good things. Take the Quakers as an example. They were the heart of the underground railroad in this country. They didn’t just talk the talk like most other Christians, they truly walked the walk. Wesley himself wrote many sermons blasting our treatment of Native Americans; and overall John Wesley was the real deal. He was a guy who you could literally slap in the face and he would look back smiling – with a calm kind demeanor & probably try and help you figure out why you were so darn angry. He was the sort of guy no one could figure out how to dislike; even those who vehemently disagreed with him. Heck his best friend was a Calvinist (George Whitfield).

If Muslims stopped taking such a literal view of the Koran I have no doubt the world would be a much better place to live in. Thankfully Christians have by and large walked away from literalism (and literalism led to some pretty sad moments in history like the church imprisoning Galileo for his public disagreement with geocentric cosmology, or Puritan lunacy during our colonial period – just to name a couple examples). Unfortunately biblical literalism is still around; particularly here in the United States.
You were right about 2 things, !, You don’t have much credibility on this issue and 2, You DO dribble. Me thinks your very confused. God Bless, Memaw
 
The Bible very clearly states that Jesus died as a ransom for all men and that God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth because God is Love. [1 Timothy 2:3-7, 1 John 4:8] Since He desires this, then He makes it possible. Otherwise He cannot be God.

However, not all men are saved. This is because they use their own free wills to thwart God’s Salvation Plan.

Predestination is only used in a positive sense in Scripture, never a negative. Persons are predestined because of God’s foreknowledge. They are not predestined arbitrarily by a vindictive God. [1 Peter 1:2, Romans 8:29] He judges all of us without partiality. Our own actions condemn us, if we are to be condemned. [Titus 3:10-11, John 3:18, John 3:17, Matthew 12:37]

So, before we were born, God saw us and all of our “works” and He predestined those who would fear Him and work righteousness. This is the only criteria which He chose to judge us. [1 Peter 1:16-17, Acts 10:34-35]

For more on Free Will: members.cox.net/studyhisword/FreeWill.pdf

Yes, God gives some persons more faith than others, but He gives every person enough faith in order to be saved. [Hebrews 11:6, Romans 10:17]

A person can reject Christ at any point during his life and unless he repents and confesses before death, he will not inherit eternal life.

Whether persons believe in heaven and hell or not will not change their realities.
look I’m aware of your position; as should have been apparent by my post (and frankly I think it’s the better position – though it doesn’t find very good harmony with the preponderance of scripture). I think your view (and the verses you’re cherry picking) paints an overly simplistic picture. Calvinists would agree that negative reprobation is passive. However, passive or not – Calvin simply followed the rabbit trail to its logical end.

The Catholic St. Augustine agreed with Calvin (indeed was the first serious theologian to promulgate this interpretation of scripture) on one profound point. Salvific grace is not imputed universally (i.e. the Arminian position of prevenient grace). If you read Ephesians 2, Romans 9, etc. this view view seems to be quite emphatically affirmed by Paul (and also turn to John 6 and 10 … and you will also find pretty solid support for double predestination). Even Peter affirms negative predestination in his epistles.

The problem of course has always been that there are some verses that seem to have this universal aspect. However, at one point even Jesus says he does not pray for the whole world, but rather only those whom the father gave to him (i.e. the elect). The idea of election or predestination is also affirmed in the synoptic gospels.

What to do with those universal verses you cite is another question. Luther believed in unlimited atonement (although he also held a view of “single” predestination). IMO the logical problems with single predestination are obvious. If god predestined some to the exclusion of others … then by default he destined those “others” to hell (even thought he doesn’t actively cause them to disobey). This is really all Calvin said (and actually Calvin never delved into the atonement question too deeply). For both Luther and Calvin predestination was a mystery, one that they opined must be accepted by the Christian as a matter of faith. They both agreed the Catholic view was full of unscriptural sophism (and therefore, as we all know, they harshly rejected it).

Calvin understood those universal verses as benevolent statements by god … but never got into it too deeply. I personally always agree with that idea … but added a little caveat of my own. When I was a believer I always felt that god’s plan required the destruction of some (indeed the bible states as much). Notwithstanding the necessity of destroying some … god still doesn’t desire or like the destruction of anyone.

This idea is hard to swallow for many Christians … because it portrays a god who does things he doesn’t want to do (namely send some people to hell). However, isn’t it true that under any soteriological theory god must destroy some against his wishes (unless you’re a universalist)? So it really becomes a question of how you view divine providence and sovereignty (and whether or not you take a high view of providence). The bible seems to clearly affirm that god’s choices are not dependent on man (our desires, efforts, etc. have no influence over god’s eternal decisions, which were made before creation). The only question in Augustine’s mind (if I remember correctly) was whether some of the elect could be lost (not whether any of those destined for perdition could be saved); given the ideas presented by language like “blotted out of the book of life.”
 
I believe and feel many of the negative resentment and stereo types of the Catholic faith has been influenced by governments distorting law; with ideologies that consist of greed, murder, and ethnic cleansing to name a few :eek:. But, due to this era we are living in has given the glory the GOD of the most Holy trinity! 👍
 
You were right about 2 things, !, You don’t have much credibility on this issue and 2, You DO dribble. Me thinks your very confused. God Bless, Memaw
gee … that was an intelligent response. :confused:

gotta love that good old fashioned Christian bigotry :eek::eek::eek:
 
gee … that was an intelligent response. :confused:

gotta love that good old fashioned Christian bigotry :eek::eek::eek:
However in the world you could come up with, 'that good 0ld fashioned Christian bigotry" out of what I said, is way beyond me. Come down to earth and study your Catholic Faith and forget all that other nonsense. However could you give up the Holy Eucharist for that. God Bless, Memaw
 
This idea is hard to swallow for many Christians … because it portrays a god who does things he doesn’t want to do (namely send some people to hell). However, isn’t it true that under any soteriological theory god must destroy some against his wishes (unless you’re a universalist)?
Perhaps you’re misunderstanding the Catholic understanding of hell. Isn’t the separation from Him forever (hell) done of our own free choice?
 
Ok, Moondweller. I’m done messing with you–I’ve been waiting to see how well you knew Catholicism and…er…baiting you a bit. :o

If you had read the encyclicals I’d cited, you would have found this (in Fides et Ratio): The First Vatican Council… teaches that the obedience of faith requires the engagement of the intellect and the will: “Since human beings are totally dependent on God as their creator and Lord, and created reason is completely subject to uncreated truth, we are obliged to yield through faith to God the revealer full submission of intellect and will” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith Dei Filius, III: DS 3008).

And from Veritatis Splendour: While exchanges and conflicts of opinion may constitute normal expressions of public life in a representative democracy, moral teaching certainly cannot depend simply upon respect for a process: indeed, it is in no way established by following the rules and deliberative procedures typical of a democracy. Dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God. Opposition to the teaching of the Church’s Pastors cannot be seen as a legitimate expression either of Christian freedom or of the diversity of the Spirit’s gifts.

😛
 
look I’m aware of your position; as should have been apparent by my post (and frankly I think it’s the better position – though it doesn’t find very good harmony with the preponderance of scripture). I think your view (and the verses you’re cherry picking) paints an overly simplistic picture. Calvinists would agree that negative reprobation is passive. However, passive or not – Calvin simply followed the rabbit trail to its logical end.
You are entitled to your opinion, whether erroneous or not. 😃

Hmmmm, cherry-picking is not how I would describe my Scripture quotes. My Scripture quotes actually back up what I say. God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth and Jesus died as a ransom for all men. His Word states this very plainly so if you think that other Scripture verses contradict this, then your interpretation of the other Scripture verses is not correct.

Since God desires all men to be saved, then He makes it possible for them to be saved. However, He forces no person against his own will to be saved and He forces no person against his own will to be lost. God’s own Plan will be done, but He never infringes on any person’s free will in order to have His own will/Plan done.

Judas decided to betray Christ using his own free will and God used Judas’ decision in His own Plan of Salvation, because He knew before Judas was born, that Judas would betray Christ. God did not force Judas to conform to His own Plan. God knew what Judas was going to do before Judas was born and this is why it was prophesied, hundreds of years before Judas was born by God’s chosen prophet, that Judas would betray Christ.
The Catholic St. Augustine agreed with Calvin (indeed was the first serious theologian to promulgate this interpretation of scripture) on one profound point. Salvific grace is not imputed universally (i.e. the Arminian position of prevenient grace). If you read Ephesians 2, Romans 9, etc. this view view seems to be quite emphatically affirmed by Paul (and also turn to John 6 and 10 … and you will also find pretty solid support for double predestination). Even Peter affirms negative predestination in his epistles.
Actually, if there is any agreement between the two men, it would have had to have been Calvin agreeing with Augustine since Augustine lived about 1200 years before Calvin. The Semitic manner of speaking (as exaggeration) “seems” to show that God created men for the express purpose to save some and to damn others such as Pharaoh, but this is not what is meant at all. Paul actually states “what if” meaning it really is not any of our business what God does or does not do in the first place since God’s thoughts and His ways are not like ours.

Pharaoh hardened his own heart against God. God allowed him to do it because he gave Pharaoh free will just as He gave each of us free will. It is a Semitic manner of expression when they attribute a person’s own hardness of heart to having it as coming from God. God hardens no person’s heart. He allows persons to harden their own hearts out of their own disobedience. However, because Pharaoh did harden his own heart against God and His people, the Israelites, God used Pharaoh as an example to show His own mighty power, and His name is now indeed declared throughout the earth because of Pharaoh’s own hardness of heart. Pharaoh’s hardness of heart made it possible for God to show His love and protection to His people in a mighty manner which they will never forget.

James 1:13 “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.” God is both merciful and just. If He condemns a person to hell through no fault of his own, then God is not just. If He is not just, then He is not God!
The problem of course has always been that there are some verses that seem to have this universal aspect. However, at one point even Jesus says he does not pray for the whole world, but rather only those whom the father gave to him (i.e. the elect). The idea of election or predestination is also affirmed in the synoptic gospels.
Of course, He does not pray for the whole world, He already knows who will be saved and who will not be saved. God does not waste any effort praying for people who will reject Him and His Salvation Plan, and He already knew who would be saved and who would be lost because of His foreknowledge of every person’s actions before the earth was made. He knows who will be saved and who will not be saved because He has foreknowledge of every person’s actions before they actually do them!

to be continued…
 
Continued:
What to do with those universal verses you cite is another question. Luther believed in unlimited atonement (although he also held a view of “single” predestination). IMO the logical problems with single predestination are obvious. If god predestined some to the exclusion of others … then by default he destined those “others” to hell (even thought he doesn’t actively cause them to disobey). This is really all Calvin said (and actually Calvin never delved into the atonement question too deeply). For both Luther and Calvin predestination was a mystery, one that they opined must be accepted by the Christian as a matter of faith. They both agreed the Catholic view was full of unscriptural sophism (and therefore, as we all know, they harshly rejected it).
De’ fault is their own. 😃

God only predestined persons to heaven because of His foreknowledge of every person’s actions, and He knew every person’s thoughts, words, and actions before He created them, so He knew who would accept His Salvation Plan and He also knew who would reject His Salvation Plan.

He predestined only those persons whom He knew were going to inherit eternal life. He did not make them choose salvation against their own wills nor did He make them choose damnation against their own wills; they used their own free wills to save themselves or damn themselves. He just knew the final outcome before they were born. [1 Timothy 4:16]
Calvin understood those universal verses as benevolent statements by god … but never got into it too deeply. I personally always agree with that idea … but added a little caveat of my own. When I was a believer I always felt that god’s plan required the destruction of some (indeed the bible states as much). Notwithstanding the necessity of destroying some … god still doesn’t desire or like the destruction of anyone.
God is love. He loves all His creation. He never created in order to destroy. He made man in His own image and likeness. He loved both Esau and Jacob, but He preferred Jacob’s character more. This again is the Semitic manner of speaking using exaggeration. God’s creation is good. Rebellion against Him changes good into evil.

Wisdom 11:24 “For thou lovest all things that exist, and hast loathing for none of the things which thou hast made, for thou wouldst not have made anything if thou hadst hated it.”
This idea is hard to swallow for many Christians … because it portrays a god who does things he doesn’t want to do (namely send some people to hell). However, isn’t it true that under any soteriological theory god must destroy some against his wishes (unless you’re a universalist)? So it really becomes a question of how you view divine providence and sovereignty (and whether or not you take a high view of providence). The bible seems to clearly affirm that god’s choices are not dependent on man (our desires, efforts, etc. have no influence over god’s eternal decisions, which were made before creation). The only question in Augustine’s mind (if I remember correctly) was whether some of the elect could be lost (not whether any of those destined for perdition could be saved); given the ideas presented by language like “blotted out of the book of life.”
No one is “destined” for perdition. It is their own free will choices which determine whether they will be saved or not by God’s grace.
 
Since God desires all men to be saved, then He makes it possible for them to be saved. However, He forces no person against his own will to be saved and He forces no person against his own will to be lost.
*For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:8).

Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?” But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ " Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory (Romans 9:19-23).

The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil (Proverbs 16:4).

Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone, and, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for (Peter 2:7-8).

Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep (John 10:25-26).

The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out (John 10:3).

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day (John 6:44).

Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him” (John 6:64-65).

I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours (John 17:9).

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will (Ephesians 1:4-5).*

I can go on and on with these sort of verses … but hopefully you see my point?
Judas decided to betray Christ using his own free will and God used Judas’ decision in His own Plan of Salvation, because He knew before Judas was born, that Judas would betray Christ.
Yes … this is passive reprobation (no one, including Calvin, avers otherwise).
The Semitic manner of speaking (as exaggeration) “seems” to show that God created men for the express purpose to save some and to damn others such as Pharaoh, but this is not what is meant at all.
there’s many different views on this (including the idea that Paul was speaking in Greek rhetorical style). However, there’s more than just the Pharaoh reference in Rom. 9 that supports double predestination. Many other verses relay the same idea (the idea that god’s choices in election have nothing to do with human will or effort is a repeated theme in scripture).
Pharaoh hardened his own heart against God. God allowed him to do it because he gave Pharaoh free will just as He gave each of us free will.
When you read Aquinas or Aristotle (and his metaphysics) it’s hard to say they believed mankind has total free will. Every action and thought has a preceding cause (indeed this is an idea Aristotle uses to prove god exists). Therefore, if actions and events that precede us, which are outside of our control, influence and sometimes dictate our actions – then it’s hard to say humans have a complete level of free will.
James 1:13 “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.” God is both merciful and just.
yes & Calvin wouldn’t dispute James here. Moreover, Calvin would never say God is unjust; though he would say it’s difficult for finite man to understand divine justice (since predestination does seem arbitrary from our perspective).
Of course, He does not pray for the whole world, He already knows who will be saved and who will not be saved.
He stated that he does not pray for the world, but rather only those who the father gave him. He also states that no one can come to the son unless the father draws them. When you take all these sort of statements in tandem; the picture becomes clear. However, yes there is the problem of the verses you elude to (like 1 Tim. 2:3-4). The question is which direction is easier to harmonize; and what makes more sense?

Augustine & Calvin would both say we do not choose god, but rather god chooses us. God does not choose us because he passively looked down the tunnel of time & saw us doing the right thing. As humans, according to scripture, we’re incapable of doing the right thing without divine grace (therefore no amount of meritorious conduct on our part can earn our way into heaven or make us righteous in god’s eyes). God’s choices are made independent of our choices, actions, desires, efforts, and so on.

However, Augustine would say there’s some amount of foreknowledge involved (but he would also say it’s absurd to imagine foreknowledge preceding decree, since that would have the tail wagging the dog and create a logical paradox).
 
At OP:

lol Nobody is going to learn anything from an RCIA class. Not even Catholics.
 
It’ll probably be next Easter.

BTW, it’s possible that the parish in question isn’t really the right parish for you.
Why do you say that?
Over here there isn’t much variety when it comes to churches!
Plus, it is Jesus Christ that I go for, not the priest.
 
Yes I can, when I was very young, I once went to a Baptist service with a cousin and they had an alter call and I knew nothing about what they were doing, All had to stand. They said, "If you have accepted Christ as your Personal Savior, please sit. Then he said, if you have not yet accepted Christ as your personal Savior, please remain standing, we will pray and sing till you all come forward to receive Him. I tried to sit down and my cousin asked me if I have ever accepted Christ as my personal Savior and I said,“I don’t know what you mean”. So she told me to stay standing. Finally I was about the only one left standing and felt so out of place and I finally set down whether she liked it or not. Later she chastised me for setting down and said I have not been saved, that I need to accept Christ as my personal Savior if I want to go to Heaven. And I told her I have ALWAYS known and believed and accepted that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior ever since I could remember. I have NO doubt about that. Well of course she didn’t accept that and I never went back. BUT after many conversations etc, she left the Baptist Church and came into the Catholic Faith, much to the anger of her preacher.

If I would have been there, I would have helped you IF I knew you wanted help. We are not mind readers so you need to start a conversation with someone just as you would at any other gathering. My Aunt, walked my husband thru the Catholic Latin Mass, years ago, and he never forgot that.
Thanks for your help, Memaw, but the thing is I DID asked some one and try to talk to them. But they just said “Fill this member ship form in.”
No one had time to talk to me. I was so isolated and people kept giving me evil looks because I didn’t know when to kneel or what page to go to…
My old Methodist church was so much friendlier. But I wont turn back to it just because of a few weird people in the catholic church. I go for Christ and his church and no one will discourage me from that.:bible1:

Thanks any way.😦
 
Thanks for your help, Memaw, but the thing is I DID asked some one and try to talk to them. But they just said “Fill this member ship form in.”
No one had time to talk to me. I was so isolated and people kept giving me evil looks because I didn’t know when to kneel or what page to go to…
My old Methodist church was so much friendlier. But I wont turn back to it just because of a few weird people in the catholic church. I go for Christ and his church and no one will discourage me from that.:bible1:

Thanks any way.😦
Don’t give up, I would suggest you call another Catholic Catholic and make an appointment with a priest and explain to him your problem. God Bless, Memaw
 
Don’t give up, I would suggest you call another Catholic Catholic and make an appointment with a priest and explain to him your problem. God Bless, Memaw
Talk to a priest!? - :frighten: scary stuff… I will give it a go.
thanks Menaw:D
 
When you read Aquinas or Aristotle (and his metaphysics) it’s hard to say they believed mankind has total free will. Every action and thought has a preceding cause (indeed this is an idea Aristotle uses to prove god exists). Therefore, if actions and events that precede us, which are outside of our control, influence and sometimes dictate our actions – then it’s hard to say humans have a complete level of free will.

yes & Calvin wouldn’t dispute James here. Moreover, Calvin would never say God is unjust; though he would say it’s difficult for finite man to understand divine justice (since predestination does seem arbitrary from our perspective).

He stated that he does not pray for the world, but rather only those who the father gave him. He also states that no one can come to the son unless the father draws them. When you take all these sort of statements in tandem; the picture becomes clear. However, yes there is the problem of the verses you elude to (like 1 Tim. 2:3-4). The question is which direction is easier to harmonize; and what makes more sense?

Augustine & Calvin would both say we do not choose god, but rather god chooses us. God does not choose us because he passively looked down the tunnel of time & saw us doing the right thing. As humans, according to scripture, we’re incapable of doing the right thing without divine grace (therefore no amount of meritorious conduct on our part can earn our way into heaven or make us righteous in god’s eyes). God’s choices are made independent of our choices, actions, desires, efforts, and so on.

However, Augustine would say there’s some amount of foreknowledge involved (but he would also say it’s absurd to imagine foreknowledge preceding decree, since that would have the tail wagging the dog and create a logical paradox).
Jesus said:John 3:14-18 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."He doesn’t say that whoever believes in Aristotle, Augustine, Calvin or Aquinas, but whoever believes in Him. Maybe you’ve spent so much time reading the words of mere men you overlooked the simple words of the Son of Man.John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."Nope, He doesn’t mention Aristotle, Augustine, Calvin or Aquinas. Maybe in all your reading you missed this one simple, little point. Like many of the religious you stumbled over the simplicity of the gospel.

God hasn’t made salvation difficult, H-I-D, men have. Your problem is you’ve sought men, rather than the Son of Man.Acts 4:12 "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."Aristotle? Augustine? Calvin? Aquinas? No, none of those names. You found no salvation in them so now you’ve looked to Darwin. But there’s no salvation in that name either. God has promised life in one name, and one name only. Keep looking - although it’s right in front of you.
 
Why do you say that?
Over here there isn’t much variety when it comes to churches!
Plus, it is Jesus Christ that I go for, not the priest.
Well, if you feel it’s the right parish for you, then it probably is. I just didn’t want you to assume that every single parish is exactly like that.
 
Peterj: Not saying that people don’t “bash” or persecute others because of their beliefs, just talking about one responds to said persecution! All Christians should feel proud to be persecuted for His sake! It comes down to where your focus is; on Jesus, or on this world! Our flesh is very weak, jealous, and demanding; it always wants its’ way! Remember what happened to Peter, once he took his eyes off of Jesus, when he was waliking on water! I have had my share of people attacking my beliefs, an/or shunning me because I have chosen to follow Christ:confused:But, my desire to serve Him, and to share Him with others, saved or not, is much stronger than those who choose to mock Jesus and His Bride! Don’t get me wrong; I understand where you’re coming from, and I know that many people such as yourself, take these “bashing” incidents to heart! I actually find myself praying for my tormentors; it makes them crazy! God bless you, and may His peace permeate your soul!👍
 
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:8).

Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?” But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ " Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory (Romans 9:19-23).

The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil (Proverbs 16:4).
Yes, God made all things, but He did not make them evil! [Genesis 1:31] Paul did not say that God made things specifically for His destruction. He said that God made the things that would eventually turn to wickedness. Like I said before, Paul is simply using a roundabout way to tell us that it is none of our business what God’s thoughts and ways are. We all deserve eternal damnation because of Adam’s sin, however, God had mercy on us and sent His Son to redeem all of us.

It is true that He is more merciful toward some persons than others and this is according to His Divine Justice, but every person receives more mercy than they deserve and it is enough mercy in order "to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." [2 Peter 3:9] God gave each person He created “enough” gift of “faith” in order to be “saved.” God is Love. But, He does give some persons (Israelites) more mercy than others (Egyptians). And, His more generous gift to these Israelites causes jealousy in those (Pharaoh) whom He does not give the more generous gift.

“He hardens those whom He wants to harden” does not mean that He literally prevents them from doing good. What it means is that God’s own goodness towards others makes the evil persons jealous and it is their own jealousy that hardens their own hearts. So, the blame is put on God and is said that “God hardened their hearts.” In other words, the goodness of **God **towards the Israelites hardened Pharaoh’s heart. Other examples of this type of speech are, “If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out” and “Call no man your Father” and “heaps coals upon his head.” This is a Semitic manner of speaking and it is not to be taken literally.
Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone, and, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for (Peter 2:7-8).
Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep (John 10:25-26).
The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out (John 10:3).
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day (John 6:44).
No one was “destined” for hell. God made all things and called them “good.” So, what changed the “good” to “evil?” It was not God!!! Angel and Man both had/have free will to either obey God or disobey God.

“Come to me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Jesus invites every person to lay down their heavy burdens of sin, but only those persons who actually do repent and confess will inherit eternal life and only these were placed in the Father’s and Jesus’ hands. Those who will not inherit eternal life never were placed in the Father’s hand. [John 10:29] Jesus knew who His “sheep” were going to be before they knew themselves, but He prevented no one from becoming His sheep! [Luke 15:7] His desire is that everyone become one of His sheep, but He forces no one to do so, because man has free will to either accept Him or reject Him.
Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him” (John 6:64-65).
I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours (John 17:9).
Like I said, He knew from the beginning, before creation, who would believe in Him and who would not. This is because of foreknowledge. He knew that both Judas and Peter would betray Him before they actually did. So, both of their betrayals were used in God’s Plan. God caused neither of them to betray Him, but He used both of their betrayals in His own Plan of Redemption.

John 13:2 “And supper being ended, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray Him,” [John 13:18-30]

Satan tempts man to do evil, God does not.

James 1:13 “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.”

to be continued…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top