It would look like this. As Calvin preached, and ministered he was struck with his experience that some seemed primed and ready to receive the Gospel and others simply had no interest for it. Now this is a completely shallow description of his experience but his experience led him to seek out an understanding for his experience in Scripture. In the Bible he found his answer in the verses which seem to prove his predestination experiences.
Calvin believed in Prdestination because he had read Augustine and, more importantly, the Bible.
"It is, therefore, in the power of the wicked to sin; but that in sinning they should do this or that by that wickedness is not in their power, but in God’s, who divides the darkness and regulates it; so that hence even what they do contrary to God’s will is not fulfilled except it be God’s will."
“…it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” (Matt 13.11)
The Thomist position is very close to the Calvinist position. I am not a Catholic, but as I understand the Catholic Church’s position, Catholics are free to choose between the Molinist and Thomist position re predestination, but predestination itself is a Catholic dogma. The Molinist position would probably be more to your liking than the Thomist.
You are judged not by the outcome, but by the intent. If the intent was to do evil, the fact that in doing so you furthered God’s plan is neither here nor there.
Anybody who thinks they are smart enough to “understand” predestination is a fool. Like the Trinity, it is something which has to be accepted by faith, even though you can’t understand it. You should perhaps take refuge in Molina’s position.
I was introduced to this idea of “limited atonement” and predestination in my protestant bible study about 10 yrs ago. Got me started on a search for truth that led me back to the Catholic Church within the next five years..
I read this short story about how this woman converted from Presbyterianism…
They (some?) apparently believe that God created some people for Heaven and some for Hell…:hypno::coffeeread:
I thought:
What!!!
Who could possibly believe such a preposterous thing? True, it isn’t the first time I’ve heard of it but for some reason it hit me especially hard last night as i read this story… :banghead::banghead:
Have you run into this kind of thing when talking to people about religion?
There is that one scripture about… something about being predestined for… [something]
i don’t have my Bible handy…
anyway, i believe that God, when He created us and gave us free will, chose NOT to know our futures. I believe (know) that He allowed us to be total “gods” over our destinies… our choices…
Wow, forgive my ignorance on the issue and my inability to keep up on this one. I never in my wildest dreams thought I’d come across a theory like predestination *within *catholicism.
) But I shall do my best to understand.
so I don’t know how reliable the guy is. But he seems to be knowlegeable enough. I think I’ll read some of his stuff and maybe speak to my favorite deacon at Church.
I concur.
i think that when a person becomes Catholic, wehther through infatn baptism or otherwise, s/he becomes the elect… not sure the RCC would affirm this or not… (?)
In the Calvinist pantheon, Augustine comes second only to Calvin himself. There is a reason for that. As I have said so many times before in this thread, anybody who wants to know the views of Aquinas or Augustine only needs to read them. Could it be that nobody wants to read them because they are afraid of what they might find?
happilycatholic;5557464:
Yes, maybe that’s my problem with this whole thing as well. I just don’t see the reason for Christ’s death on the cross if he died for those bound for hell. And if some were bound for Heaven at the inception of their souls, what would be the need for Christ’s Atonement?
I do not believe that God predestines his people to Hell. I do not beleive that God places sin in man’s path or man in the path of sin to effect His will.
That to me is what’s crazy.
But…Dave Armstrong (catholic apologist and author) who has a blog site and web site dedicated to catholic apology is quite understandable and I would suggest reading his work. It’s very informative and I think his writing style is very adequate for the scholar and those who are “not so much” such as myself.
Oh and by the way distracted, Thank You for bringing this up. It is VERY interesting to say the least!
***To hold such a view is beyond the pale of logic and what we can know about the Nature of God.
- in doubt, put the worst possible construction on how those who don’t agree with you think. Which is not a moral approach, even by Catholic standards; and it is invalid as reasoning.What St. Augustine taught - what the Catholic Church teaches is not a difficult concept to grasp. Man cannot do good works without the grace of God, so in that sense we do not have the free will to do good without God’s grace. But you know what?
“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.” (Titus 2:11)
God offers Christ’s salvific grace to all people, because “God does not show favoritism.” (Romans 2:11) But it is up to us, of our own free will, to cooperate with His grace, that He has freely given us, not based on merit, so that we can stay in His grace.
I’m not sure what you meant above, but I hope you’re not saying that St. Augustine taught “double predestination”, or that he denied free will. He said, in the aforementioned book (Ch.5):
“But who of us will say that by the sin of the first man free will perished from the human race?”
He was responding to Julian (a Pelagian), who also twisted Augustine’s words to make him deny free will, as the Calvinists do, except they do so to support their doctrine. So Augustine’s message here is for them as well (Ch. 9):
“Away, then, with the notion that in my book that man should read anything opposed to these divine testimonies! But either by not understanding, or rather by calumniating, he seeks to twist what he reads into another meaning.”
Now, ironically, I had not read this treatise by Augustine before, and yet…
“But against the Pelagians also, not without reason, we pronounce an anathema, for that they are so hostile to God’s grace, which comes through Jesus Christ our Lord, as to say that it is given not freely, but according to our merits, and thus grace is no more grace; [Romans 11:6] and place so much in free will by which man is plunged into the abyss, as to say that by making good use of it man deserves grace—although no man can make good use of it except by grace, which is not repaid according to debt, but is given freely by God’s mercy. And they so contend that infants are already saved, that they dare deny that they are to be saved by the Saviour. And holding and disseminating these execrable dogmas, they still over and above constantly demand a hearing, when, as condemned, they ought to repent.” (Ch. 42)
I seem to recall hearing of this, quite a while ago. [1970’s or 80’s?]
No, I don’t believe it would.