A Catholic thought about the doctrine of Predestination.

[sawdust]

He knows the destiny beforehand, choosing to create this particular world where His will is ultimately done, but does not so affect and overwhelm us as to strictly determine our choices, without regard to our own choosing IOW. Man is created a free moral agent, left in the hands of his own counsel, and yet the only way he can fulfill is purpose is to freely turn to God, subjugating himself to God's wisdom and will and love.

I'm sorry, I don't see how our free will alters God's choice. Predestination is NOT about God choosing who to save or not to save. That is the error from many. Predestination is about God choosing what to do and where to put those who are saved ie. believers. He could have put you in the Garden or the Ark or in Israel or even have you born in the Millennium. Whatever choices you make in life, at whatever time and place you are, has no bearing on God's Election.

 

[QvQ]

First, a person must be aware of God. That is Grace.
Grace is not without. Grace is within.
The awareness of God is of the Holy Spirit.

(Just thinking about exactly what Grace is and how it all fits together)

 

[fhansen]

I'm sorry, I don't see how our free will alters God's choice. Predestination is NOT about God choosing who to save or not to save. That is the error from many. Predestination is about God choosing what to do and where to put those who are saved ie. believers. He could have put you in the Garden or the Ark or in Israel or even have you born in the Millennium. Whatever choices you make in life, at whatever time and place you are, has no bearing on God's Election.

They have everything to do with Gods election. Otherwise God is just a puppet master, deciding to put some in heaven, the rest in eternal torment. Why bother giving Adam a choice to begin with, or later commanding man to choose good over evil, life over death? It’s all about man’s will, responding to Gods grace, or not. Otherwise He could’ve avoided all the sin/evil that has transpired down through human history and just stocked heaven with the elect and hell with the damned at the beginning, never offering man the option if that was His plan to begin with anyway.

Instead He never abandoned man but chose to patiently work with him over centuries, drawing him closer to the light where He would finally, fully reveal Himself through the advent of His Son when we might finally be just ready to accept and embrace that light, and continue to do so throughout our lives. If we will.

 

[sawdust]

They have everything to do with Gods election. Otherwise God is just a puppet master, deciding to put some in heaven, the rest in eternal torment. Why bother giving Adam a choice to begin with, or later commanding man to choose good over evil, life over death? It’s all about man’s will, responding to Gods grace, or not. Otherwise He could’ve avoided all the sin/evil that has transpired down through human history and just stocked heaven with the elect and hell with the damned at the beginning, never offering man the option if that was His plan to begin with anyway.

Instead He never abandoned man but chose to patiently work with him over centuries, drawing him closer to the light where He would finally, fully reveal Himself through the advent of His Son when we might finally be just ready to accept and embrace that light, and continue to do so throughout our lives. If we will.

I don't think you understood what I said. Predestination has nothing to do with unbelievers. There is no "the rest in eternal torment". God is not predetermining who to save. You need to look at it from God's perspective. Here He is with a host of saved people (believers), now the question remains what to do with them. Foreknowledge has already kicked in and separated the believers from the unbelievers. Now we move on to predestination of the believers. He doesn't decide where to put you based on how good a believer you are or not. He puts you where He wants based on His own choices. No input from us whatsoever. If I had my way, I'd much rather fellowship with the likes of Job or Daniel or King David but God put me in the Church age so we're stuck with each other.

 

[fhansen]

I don't think you understood what I said. Predestination has nothing to do with unbelievers. There is no "the rest in eternal torment". God is not predetermining who to save. You need to look at it from God's perspective. Here He is with a host of saved people (believers), now the question remains what to do with them. Foreknowledge has already kicked in and separated the believers from the unbelievers. Now we move on to predestination of the believers. He doesn't decide where to put you based on how good a believer you are or not. He puts you where He wants based on His own choices. No input from us whatsoever. If I had my way, I'd much rather fellowship with the likes of Job or Daniel or King David but God put me in the Church age so we're stuck with each other.

Ok, And I don't believe for a moment that God predestines anyone to hell-and that teaching was rejected by the church centuries ago. The rest of your thinking I don't quite understand. Heaven is to be with God, who happens to be the source of uncompromised satisfaction, bliss, happiness for man. He's the ultimate, incomparable GOOD, the object of all human desire. There aren't any alternatives for believers.

 

[Hawkins]

The doctrine of predestination holds that God has chosen certain individuals for salvation before the foundation of the world.

That's not entirely true. Predestination is a term only barely mentioned by Apostle Paul who was a Pharisee. So he spoke it with the Pharisaic concept which says no one actually understands what it is. The Essenes believed that humans have no freewill, everything is pre-determined. They believed an absolute predestination while freewill is just a delusion. The Pharisee however think that freewill can somehow (we don't actually how) hamonize with God's predestination. That is, predestination and freewill coexist.

The big picture is, God knows before hand that who will be saved at the end. However God needs to set up an open standard to identify the saved under open witnessing. Primarily such a standard is Law. To put it another way, "God knows who is saved in the end" itself is not good enough, as it lacks open witnessing to say that God is a fair and just God. Only with an open standard with an open afterward Judgment that everyone (not an absolute but rather generally speaking) is judged fairly and openly that it can tell that God is a fair and just God.

For that matter, predestination bears the meaning that even God knows before hand, we need to go through an open standard in order to be saved. God on the other hand designed such a standard, which is His Law and covenants, such that not a single one of His sheep (or His Elect) will be left behind.

That said. Calvinists are on the same boat as the Essenes.

 

[QvQ]

God chose Israel, an entire nation as the elect.
Matt 15:22 -27

Prophesy, if reliable is foreknowledge.

 

[sawdust]

Ok, And I don't believe for a moment that God predestines anyone to hell-and that teaching was rejected by the church centuries ago. The rest of your thinking I don't quite understand. Heaven is to be with God, who happens to be the source of uncompromised satisfaction, bliss, happiness for man. He's the ultimate, incomparable GOOD, the object of all human desire. There aren't any alternatives for believers.

Exactly! (the bit I bolded in your post above). That is predestination in it's general sense, ie. ultimately the new heavens and earth in the eternal state which all believers are destined for. Specifically, God has destined each believer to their spot in time and place according to His purpose without consideration to our particular strengths or weaknesses, personality or anything else that is peculiar to ourselves. You and I have been destined to be in Christ. King David and Isaiah were destined to be in the nation of Israel.

You spoke before about man's will in response to God's grace. I'm not denying free will, what I'm saying is free will comes under the umbrella of the doctrine of foreknowledge. It's within that doctrine that God separates the believer from the unbeliever which is why the doctrines of predestination and election don't have to take our will into account. Remember predestination is based on foreknowledge.

Does that make it any clearer?

 

[fhansen]

Exactly! (the bit I bolded in your post above). That is predestination in it's general sense, ie. ultimately the new heavens and earth in the eternal state which all believers are destined for. Specifically, God has destined each believer to their spot in time and place according to His purpose without consideration to our particular strengths or weaknesses, personality or anything else that is peculiar to ourselves. You and I have been destined to be in Christ. King David and Isaiah were destined to be in the nation of Israel.

You spoke before about man's will in response to God's grace. I'm not denying free will, what I'm saying is free will comes under the umbrella of the doctrine of foreknowledge. It's within that doctrine that God separates the believer from the unbeliever which is why the doctrines of predestination and election don't have to take our will into account. Remember predestination is based on foreknowledge.

Does that make it any clearer?

Yes, but foreknowledge doesn't = predestination; it's simply knowledge of what will happen in the future. So, regardless of the basis for one's election, God knows the outcome either way. I'm only saying that man's free choices, in response to God's calling him, in response to God's grace, absolutely plays its role in determining his desitiny.

 

[sawdust]

Yes, but foreknowledge doesn't = predestination; it's simply knowledge of what will happen in the future. So, regardless of the basis for one's election, God knows the outcome either way. I'm only saying that man's free choices, in response to God's calling him, in response to God's grace, absolutely plays its role in determining his desitiny.

You're right, they are two distinct doctrines. Although I would say foreknowledge is more than data input (ie. simply knowing outcomes) but also includes the relationship that results from that knowledge.

Foreknowledge determines whether we have a destiny or not, but man's input (his will) doesn't determine what the destiny is, that is purely by God's own determining.

I think what is important here, is to understand the doctrine of predestination is NOT about God predetermining who is to be saved and who is not to be saved. There are too many who teach it is and only ends up confusing people.

 

[QvQ]

Grace, that is to say, God, never forces anyone into heaven. So grace, just like the Cross which is an act and gift of grace, draws us to it without outright causing us to bow to it.

Saul on the road to Damascus?

 

[fhansen]

Saul on the road to Damascus?

Even Paul acknowledged that he hadn't yet attained to the resurrection, that he was striving onwards towards heaven, in Phil 3. Yes, even after the road to Damascus. In fact, the more we're given, the humbler we become on this matter, I believe.

 

[QvQ]

Even Paul acknowledged that he hadn't yet attained to the resurrection, that he was striving onwards towards heaven, in Phil 3. Yes, even after the road to Damascus. In fact, the more we're given, the humbler we become on this matter, I believe.

The initial question of the thread, was whether a person had free will to accept or reject the grace of God.
Did Paul?
Theoretically yes.
Actually, no
However Paul was not aware of Jesus as Lord before the moment when Jesus apprehended him or took hold of him. That was initiated by Jesus. What happened to Saul was not subject to his will nor was his awareness of who was initiating the apprehension subject to his assent . The events afterwards, consenting to God's plan for him, theoretically, may have been a "yes or no" for Paul

 

[John Mullally]

The initial question of the thread, was whether a person had free will to accept or reject the grace of God.
Did Paul?
Theoretically yes.
Actually, no
However Paul was not aware of Jesus as Lord before the moment when Jesus apprehended him or took hold of him. That was initiated by Jesus. What happened to Saul was not subject to his will nor was his awareness of who was initiating the apprehension subject to his assent . The events afterwards, consenting to God's plan for him, theoretically, may have been a "yes or no" for Paul

Being knocked off your high-horse, blinded, and audibly rebuked by Jesus is uniquely persuasive. Paul positively responded and the rest is history.

Jesus offered discipleship to the “Rich Young Ruler” at Mark 10:21-23, which was genuine since Jesus “felt a love for him”. and yet the Rich Young Ruler walked away and thus rejected the grace of God. That is not surprising as Acts 7:51 tells us that the Holy Spirit is commonly resisted.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That's not entirely true. Predestination is a term only barely mentioned by Apostle Paul who was a Pharisee. So he spoke it with the Pharisaic concept which says no one actually understands what it is.

Hold your horses! Saint Paul was a Pharisee but when he wrote his letters he was a Christian. Saint Paul wrote with the knowledge of Christ and Christ's revelation of himself to saint Paul informing him. He was no longer a Pharisee and wasn't writing as a Pharisee.

 

[QvQ]

Jesus offered discipleship to the “Rich Young Ruler” at Mark 10:21-23, which was genuine since Jesus “felt a love for him”. and yet the Rich Young Ruler walked away and thus rejected the grace of God. That is not surprising as Acts 7:51 tells us that the Holy Spirit can be resisted.

The rich young man did all good works, kept all the laws and yet was not saved as he refused to follow Jesus.
That is a point on the merit for works as the works counted for little. What counted was rejecting Jesus.

Paul, in Philippians 3, said he lost all things

26 The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, “Who then can be saved?”
27 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”

 

[John Mullally]

Jesus offered discipleship to the “Rich Young Ruler” at Mark 10:21-23, which was genuine since Jesus “felt a love for him”. and yet the Rich Young Ruler walked away and thus rejected the grace of God. That is not surprising as Acts 7:51 tells us that the Holy Spirit is commonly resisted.

The rich young man did all good works, kept all the laws and yet was not saved as he said refused to follow Jesus.
That is a point on the merit for works as the works counted for little. What counted was rejecting Jesus.

I don't disagree with anything here, although I would add scripture indicates that he chose not to follow Jesus because Jesus asked him to give away his possessions. In many parts of the world today, that and more (loss of family or one's life) is the price paid to follow Jesus.