Is there any truth in the ideas expressed by double predestination?

Mark Quayle said:

So, basically, in using RCC dogma/doctrine, you are just noting —not arguing truth... Ok. I can work with that.

Click to expand...

Your comment misunderstands what I am doing: when I cite Catholic dogma I am arguing truth, because the Church teaches—on the authority given by Christ—that “the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15) and that the apostles’ teaching is preserved with divine assistance (John 16:13). Catholic dogma is not a private interpretive lens, but the normative rule of faith defined by the Church Christ established, which Vatican I affirms possesses “the charism of truth” in matters of faith and morals (Pastor Aeternus, ch. 4). So, when I state that predestination is always to grace and glory and never to damnation, I am not merely “noting RCC doctrine”; I am stating what the Church infallibly teaches on the basis of Scripture itself—namely, that God “desires all to be saved” (1 Tim 2:4), that Christ died “for all” (2 Cor 5:14–15), and that no one is damned except by freely rejecting grace (2 Thess 2:10).

St_Worm2 said:

Hello again Xeno, in this particular case (meaning in the case of this topic in this thread), oddly, I agree with you, the Reformers are irrelevant. I say this to you because what you "claimed" that the Reformers taught (concerning God and the reprobate) and what they "actually" taught are not the same thing.

I've demonstrated this by showing you what a Reformed Confession (from nearly 500 years ago) has to say, as well as what a Reformed church document from the 21st Century says (and then there's all that Mark has pointed out to you in his posts too), so sadly, it seems to me that we're done here (with this particular topic, anyway).

I do have questions to ask and perhaps some points to make about other things that you've said here, but I'll need to do that this evening (Dv).

God bless you!!

--David

Click to expand...

David, thank you for your post. It is an interesting turn of events that we find ourselves in agreement regarding the relevance of the Reformers in this specific dialogue. Whilst I hold that Catholic dogma remains the normative rule of faith—defined by the Church that serves as the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15)—I recognise the effort you have put into sharing the Reformed perspective.

My primary concern has always been to uphold the teaching that God “desires all to be saved” (1 Timothy 2:4) and that grace is extended to all, as defined by the Magisterium. If our discussion on historical interpretations has reached its natural conclusion, I am quite content to move forward.

I shall look forward to your further points and questions this evening. It is a pleasure to engage with you, and I appreciate your commitment to seeking clarity on these matters. May you have a peaceful afternoon, and I look forward to our continued conversation.