Does God already know who is going to be saved and who won't?

Dominus Fidelis · Mar 3, 2004

Lady_Swamp said:
If God have arranged everything, and we don't have free will, what's the reason for him to creat us?
I think God has given us the freedom to choose.

Of course we have the freedom to choose. You'd have to throw out 99.9% of the Bible to think otherwise.

Patristic · Mar 3, 2004

If God have arranged everything, and we don't have free will, what's the reason for him to creat us?

This reminds me of a good quote I saw awhile back by Markus Barth which states, "A God who has arranged everything beforehand can either retire or die."

So true.

Reformationist · Mar 3, 2004

Shelb5 said:
The only thing you would have to change is YOUR understanding of them.

Michelle, that would not reconcile us. At the very best, we could just agree to disagree.

God does not choose us, we chose Him.

John 15:16
You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.

Yeah. God doesn't choose us, we chose Him. Sure Michelle.

He affords us the grace to respond to His grace, with out His grace, we would only choose our will because we are natural carnal beings with out God in our lives we are not capable.

Does He give all people this grace? If so, why do some avail themselves of this grace and some don't?

The point of disagreeing is when you have to make God creating ****** people just so you can say He is sovereign and glory.

You know Michelle, you'll argue just to argue. Even though you don't think God creates people for the purpose of destruction you, too, believe God creates people that will be destroyed. The only difference between you and I in this area is that I trust that God is able to bring His own plan to fruition and that plan includes our salvation. You say that man chooses his own destiny. Both of us acknowledge that God creates many, many people who will end up in hell and He knew that before He created them. Do you deny this?

That is where we disagree. You have to say a person was created for hell to make your paradigm work.

All I do is agree with the Gospel.

Because you don't want to accept what we really believe objectively.

You're truly amazing Michelle. I think it's really amazing that you know what I want to believe and what I don't want to believe. That's so weird, considering that we don't know each other outside of this MB. Wow. You must be psychic.

Why did God allow them to choose against Him?

Silly girl. I don't need to ask them that. I already know why He did that.

Was He not powerful enough to control their choices?

Of course He was. In fact, their Fall, freely of their own volition, shows how powerful God really is.

Or did He control their choice and made them sin?

Of course not.

For what reason would God create mankind just to have them fall away?

To bring Himself glory of course. That's the same primary motivation He has for everything He does. I'm sure that this will be difficult for you because you clearly think God's entire plan revolves around humanity but the Fall of humanity was necessary to usher in our need for a Savior. If man had never fallen then man would never need a Savior. If man never needed a Savior then he would never know the Lord as his merciful Savior. He'd only know Him as Lord. So, you see, the Fall actually gives us a fuller understanding of God.

We completely understand that unless God affords the grace, we would not responded to Him at all. It is never about us but all about HIM.

Okay. Let's test that theory. Answer these simple questions and it will become clear what you believe:

1. Can anyone respond to God apart from God's grace?

2. Are we helpless in our sin apart from the grace of God?

3. Does God give every person ever created that grace to embrace Him?

4. What is the purpose for which God gives that grace?

5. Does this grace that God gives ALWAYS accomplish it's purpose?

6. If not, why not?

Where does it say that it is about His divine purpose of election?? It says that He is God and does what He wills and what he wills, he will do. Do you see how you are reading this into it? Where does it say that he chooses some and does not choose all??

Well, do you believe it is God's will that every person ever created be saved? I ask this becuase you regularly quote 2 Peter 3:9 in an effort to show that God is NOT willing that any should perish. Do you understand that to mean that He wills that all should live? Or do you believe God is indifferent to whether we're saved?

Don, you really aren't on the same page about this at all. God knows before hand who will turn from Him and who will not. Is He disappointed? I don't know His mind.

Okay, ask one of your priests. Just ask them this:

Since God desparately loves every person He ever created and desires that they repent and be saved, does that mean that He's disappointed that some/many aren't?

But I do know this; those who take the path of evil, He brings a greater good from their rebellion. This is a mystery to us that we may never see this side of heaven the good that He brought from their evil. He allows evil so that he may bring a greater good from it.

I agree with this.

He does not ordain evil.

Are you saying that God is not the author of evil? If so, I would agree. If, however, you are saying that the use of evil is not within His power to bring about His good, then I'd obviously disagree. Of course, I doubt you mean the former because you acknowledge that God brings about His will through the freely committed evil of fallen man.

So is He a failure because He does not ordain evil but allows man to choose it freely?

Michelle, I think you are misunderstanding me. For me to say that God ordains evil means that God, in eternity, ordained to use the inherent evil of men's hearts to accomplish His will. You see, God is causal in EVERY action that He does. If God has chosen not to intercede by giving grace then that means He has chosen that the result of not giving grace is what will bring Him the most glory.

He brings a greater good from every evil and always will, that is the sovereign God that I know. He does not allow evil to trump Him. But you know what? It takes a level of trust to know that even in the darkest hour He is doing good with the evil we experience. It takes a level of trust to know we may never even see the good this side of heaven.

I agree with this.

I have no memory of it but I know that I have a greater understanding of what I believe right now and am explaining this to you NOW in the correct way it needs to be explained to you.

So you don't believe God is disappointed in the eternal suffering of those He desparately loved?

We believe there are children of God and children of the devil.

WHOA! Hold on Michelle. I can't count the number of times you've argued page after page after page after page that EVERYONE is God's child. You're changing that now?

Those who do evil are the children of the devil.

Really? So who doesn't do evil? Wouldn't that make everyone the child of the devil?

They are not of God, does God love them? In so much as they have breath in their body and was created by God's own hands.

As wonderful an idea as this is, I am not aware that it's to be found anywhere in the Gospel. I know you interpret John 3:16 this way, and that's fine. In fact, there are some reformed Christians on this MB that believe John 3:16 means that God loves everyone in the Creatorship sense. However, I think that "love" is a bit too strong of a word. I think God is pleased with them, not because of their works but because they will bring to pass exactly what God wants brought to pass. Some will do this through evil, some through good.

Their life was created by God, not the devil, so He loves them to that extent but does not love the evil they do. As long as there is breath in their body they still can turn from evil and repent.

This confuses me a bit. You say, "as long as there is breath in their body they still can turn from evil and repent." You have also acknowledged that God knows who will repent and who won't repent before they're even created. So, let's consider someone that God knows won't repent. Is it possible that that person could turn and repent? I'm not asking if the option is available. I believe it is available to them. What I'm asking is, do you think it's possible that they ever would repent?

Do you disagree that when a sinner repents, nothing they have done is beyond redemption?

I don't believe that sinners repent until they are redeemed so this is a bit of a non issue for me. As to whether their are sins that God does not forgive a redeemed person for, no. If God redeems someone then they are forgiven all.

Okay. But do you believe God is not limited to human understanding and human explanations? He can do things that we may never understand this side of heaven.

Not only do I believe God can do things that we will never understand, regardless of which side of Heaven we are on, I think God does do things we will never understand.

God bless

Reformationist · Mar 3, 2004

Patristic said:
This reminds me of a good quote I saw awhile back by Markus Barth which states, "A God who has arranged everything beforehand can either retire or die."

So true.

So true if you believe that the sovereign plan of God is about the creation rather than the Creator.

Just because God establishes His plan in eternity doesn't negate the fact that it is still manifested in reality. Therefore, the plan must be done. As it is manifested God is glorified.

God bless

Reformationist · Mar 3, 2004

Lady_Swamp said:
If God have arranged everything, and we don't have free will, what's the reason for him to creat us?

To bring Himself glory. Despite what so many of you seem to believe, our creation wasn't for our glory or benefit, though we certainly do benefit. The entirity of creation was established for the express purpose of bringing glory to God. IOW, IT'S NOT ABOUT US; IT'S ABOUT GOD.

I think God has given us the freedom to choose.

I think that as well. That doesn't mean that we are free. In our unregenerate state we are slaves to our sin and every thought and action we engage in is sinful.

God bless

Benedicta00 · Mar 3, 2004

Reformationist said:
Michelle, that would not reconcile us. At the very best, we could just agree to disagree.

Havent we done that? But I will not allow a blatant misrepresentation of our theology to be passed off as the Catholic position with out correcting it even if I have to correct it a thousand more times.

John 15:16
You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.

How does this in anyway contradict our beliefs?

Yeah. God doesn't choose us, we chose Him. Sure Michelle.

We don't. Why are you putting words in my mouth? How many times do I have to state this? WE DO NOT CHOOSE HIM. He chooses us and then He affords us the grace to respond to His choice.

Does He give all people this grace? If so, why do some avail themselves of this grace and some don't?

Only God knows that and judges the person accordingly. This is precisely why we do not judge the souls of others.

You know Michelle, you'll argue just to argue.

Same can be said for you especially seeing how you will mis-state what we say 5 minutes after we have said it.

Even though you don't think God creates people for the purpose of destruction you, too, believe God creates people that will be destroyed.

Yep, see? we aren't THAT different.

The only difference between you and I in this area is that I trust that God is able to bring His own plan to fruition and that plan includes our salvation.

First you say we are that different now you say "the only difference is..." anyway, I agree with you here Don, we do not differ on this point.

You say that man chooses his own destiny.

Here we go, lets see if this will finally sink in, NO I DO NOT! God choose man first, if God did not, man's only destiny would be hell.

Both of us acknowledge that God creates many, many people who will end up in hell and He knew that before He created them. Do you deny this?

The Catholic Church teaches theoretically speaking. The Church has never condemned any soul to hell. We have no idea the extent of God mercy on the souls who leave this world and stand before Him to be judged. There is nothing in the bible or tradition that says any one soul has gone to hell. We certainly believe hell is a reality but we have no real evidence biblical or other wise to say any human soul is occupying hell. Does that mean no one is there? No, it means we can not dare pass judgement on what Christ was silent about.

Are you saying you know for a fact that souls are in hell? If so, cite please. We know that hell has occupants but we do not know as fact that they are human souls.

We say theoretically speaking that the souls of the wicked will end up there but we do not dare say who is or who isn't already there.

All I do is agree with the Gospel.

Where, where does the gospel of Christ say that? Show me.

You're truly amazing Michelle. I think it's really amazing that you know what I want to believe and what I don't want to believe. That's so weird, considering that we don't know each other outside of this MB. Wow. You must be psychic.

It doesn't take a mad rocket scientist genius to figure that when you explain something 10,000 times to a person and the person still will turn around and mis-state what was explained that something must be up.

Silly girl. I don't need to ask them that. I already know why He did that.

Silly girl? Watch your temper now. Can you cite what you know Don, and then cite the source of how you came to now it?

Of course He was. In fact, their Fall, freely of their own volition, shows how powerful God really is.

Did they freely choose sin? If so how come we can't freely choose it now? And don't give me the illogical explanation that defies all laws of common sense and logic by saying unregenerated man is free to choose what is in line with his nature. Free will means to choose between the two, in this case good and evil, not the one.

Of course not.

So why does he control them now? Because man is dead? Is there any particular reason God choose to allow man to completely die knowing all the while He won't save but just a few of them? Is there any reason at all you can give that will tell us why God had to do it this way?

To bring Himself glory of course.

And this is the sickest part of your theology if you don't mind me saying. The most unmerciful belief floating out there. So If God cut your legs off and damns you because you can not run, he is glorified?? Okay...

That's the same primary motivation He has for everything He does. I'm sure that this will be difficult for you because you clearly think God's entire plan revolves around humanity

Well what else would His plan revolved around Don? He created man for what purpose? To **** them? Give me a break. Jesus Christ is His glory. Not ****** men, nor saved men but Jesus Christ's obedience and perfection coming in humanity is His glory. It is not about us, it is about HIM.

but the Fall of humanity was necessary to usher in our need for a Savior.

We believe "Oh happy fall of Adam who won for us a savior." The mercy of God shown through Christ and because of Christ is why he allowed the fall.

If man had never fallen then man would never need a Savior. If man never needed a Savior then he would never know the Lord as his merciful Savior.

Catholics agree 100%.

He'd only know Him as Lord. So, you see, the Fall actually gives us a fuller understanding of God.

And the lack of good any one of us would do if we were not allowed to suffer.

Okay. Let's test that theory. Answer these simple questions and it will become clear what you believe:

1. Can anyone respond to God apart from God's grace?

Nope.

2. Are we helpless in our sin apart from the grace of God?

Of course.

3. Does God give every person ever created that grace to embrace Him?

Nope.

4. What is the purpose for which God gives that grace?

To make us capable of response.

5. Does this grace that God gives ALWAYS accomplish it's purpose?

Yep.

6. If not, why not?

It does, so this is mute.

Well, do you believe it is God's will that every person ever created be saved?

His desire.

I ask this becuase you regularly quote 2 Peter 3:9 in an effort to show that God is NOT willing that any should perish.

He does not desire it.

Do you understand that to mean that wills that all should live?

He desires that all should live.

Or do you believe God is indifferent to whether we're saved?

God is indifferent to those who are evil.

Okay, ask one of your priests. Just ask them this:

Since God desparately loves every person He ever created and desires that they repent and be saved, does that mean that He's disappointed that some/many aren't?

The Catholic Church does not assume to know that mind of God. I am surprised that you think God has the feelings and emotions of humans. I explained to you that He brings good from their unrepentantence. He uses this in a greater plan.

I agree with this.

Then why does this have to be all for nothing in your mind? Why can't he allow us the free will to turn away from Him and give ourselves over to evil if He can bring glory from that?

What is with you thinking God HAS to be the one to make the choice? Not the choice to give the necessary graces, nor the choice to choose us first but the choice to simply choose evil over the good that he afforded us the grace to be able to choose against?

Are you saying that God is not the author of evil? If so, I would agree. If, however, you are saying that the use of evil is not within His power to bring about His good, then I'd obviously disagree. Of course, I doubt you mean the former because you acknowledge that God brings about His will through the freely committed evil of fallen man.

Again, if you agree with this, then what is the problem with our paradigm? Why is it unacceptable to you?

Michelle, I think you are misunderstanding me. For me to say that God ordains evil means that God, in eternity, ordained to use the inherent evil of men's hearts to accomplish His will.

Man is not born inherently evil and there is no biblical support that says he is. On this your whole paradigm will hang and when you bring babies into this, it goes out the window.

You see, God is causal in EVERY action that He does. If God has chosen not to intercede by giving grace then that means He has chosen that the result of not giving grace is what will bring Him the most glory.

Choosing to **** only a certain group people who can not run because someone other than themselves cut their legs off brings God glory iyo?

I agree with this.

If you agree then what is the big hang up you have with free will?

So you don't believe God is disappointed in the eternal suffering of those He desparately loved?

Why are you assuming that God has human emotions? I do not know His mind. I said what I know. That He created all people out of love, and for reasons only known to Him He will still create a man He knows will rebel against Him. This in no way has to mean that he choose the rebellion for them so He can be glory.

WHOA! Hold on Michelle. I can't count the number of times you've argued page after page after page after page that EVERYONE is God's child. You're changing that now?

Everyone is born God's child and is inherently good, just look at babies, Don, because they were made by His hands but when a man chooses evil that sin has brought to the soul and God allows the evil to over come Him He is no longer a child of God but one of the devil. That is what I argued.

Really? So who doesn't do evil? Wouldn't that make everyone the child of the devil?

Let me rephrase because I know how you enjoy trapping people in their words and twisting there meaning.

Those who have handed themselves over freely to the evil that sin brings to the soul. You can sin but not give yourself over to evil; you can repent if God affords you the grace.

As wonderful an idea as this is, I am not aware that it's to be found anywhere in the Gospel. I know you interpret John 3:16 this way, and that's fine. In fact, there are some reformed Christians on this MB that believe John 3:16 means that God loves everyone in the Creatorship sense. However, I think that "love" is a bit too strong of a word. I think God is pleased with them, not because of their works but because they will bring to pass exactly what God wants brought to pass. Some will do this through evil, some through good.

So you are saying you have a problem with what the gospel itself says? You think it should have been worded differently? It says what it says and shoomse it all you want, when the day is over it will still say that GO SO LOVED THE WORLD.

This confuses me a bit. You say, "as long as there is breath in their body they still can turn from evil and repent." You have also acknowledged that God knows who will repent and who won't repent before they're even created.

Exactly.

So, let's consider someone that God knows won't repent. Is it possible that that person could turn and repent?

No.

I'm not asking if the option is available. I believe it is available to them. What I'm asking is, do you think it's possible that they ever would repent?

If they are a reprobate, no.

I don't believe that sinners repent until they are redeemed so this is a bit of a non issue for me. As to whether their are sins that God does not forgive a redeemed person for, no. If God redeems someone then they are forgiven all.

A reprobate can be a redeemed person who fell way from grace, just like Adam. Salvation and redemption are two different things.

Not only do I believe God can do things that we will never understand, regardless of which side of Heaven we are on, I think God does do things we will never understand.

Accept for how He can choose us but allow us to turn away and he still be glorified, successful and sovereign, right?

Benedicta00 · Mar 3, 2004

Reformationist said:
So true if you believe that the sovereign plan of God is about the creation rather than the Creator.

Just because God establishes His plan in eternity doesn't negate the fact that it is still manifested in reality. Therefore, the plan must be done. As it is manifested God is glorified.

God bless

Don,

Do you think we are just an after thought to God? That He sits in heaven just thinking about Himself all the time? What is this all or nothing attitude that you have?

Patristic · Mar 3, 2004

Reformationist said:
So true if you believe that the sovereign plan of God is about the creation rather than the Creator.

Just because God establishes His plan in eternity doesn't negate the fact that it is still manifested in reality. Therefore, the plan must be done. As it is manifested God is glorified.

God bless

That's not the point of Barth's statement at all. If God wanted to arrange everything beforehand He could do that, but then there would be no purpose for Him to intervene in history because He would have already set everything in stone beforehand. Therefore, He could either become the god of deism and just sit back and enjoy the show, or will Himself out of existence since there would be no need to involve Himself in everything He has already preplanned.

dnich163 · Mar 3, 2004

brian78 said:
The above is Ephesians 1:3-6 and talks about predestination. This passage is confusing to me, does it mean God already knows who will choose Him and who won't?

Hello Brian,

Are you the Brian in the "Life of Brian" ??...only kidding

I believe that this is really about time and our concept of it.
God is beyond time; time does not apply to God because time is "within him".

If time as we know it doesn't apply to God then it goes that within God there is no tomorrow, no past, only being.

If we accept this; and I do, then what is about to happen for us....already has...in effect.......within God.

Clear as mud eh?

David

Reformationist · Mar 3, 2004

Shelb5 said:
Haven?t we done that?

Of course. That's not the point. The point was, you were purporting that our views could be reconciled. I was clarifying that unless they change they cannot be reconciled. All we can do is agree to disagree.

But I will not allow a blatant misrepresentation of our theology to be passed off as the Catholic position with out correcting it even if I have to correct it a thousand more times.

Well kudos to you. Just remember, if I blatantly misrepresent your theology it's not malicious.

How does this in anyway contradict our beliefs?

Michelle, you're the one who said, "God does not choose us, we chose Him." All I did was provide Scripture that directly contradicted that statement. In John 15:16 Jesus clearly states that He chose us, we did not choose Him.

We don't. Why are you putting words in my mouth? How many times do I have to state this? WE DO NOT CHOOSE HIM.

Okay, great. But I'm not "putting words in your mouth." That's a direct quote of what you said in post #57. Take a look for yourself. "God does not choose us, we chose Him."

If this was a type, so be it. However, by saying that I'm "putting words in your mouth" you are bearing false witness against me, not vice versa.

He chooses us and then He affords us the grace to respond to His choice.

So His grace enables us to respond to His choice but does not ensure that we will respond positively. That's what you believe, right?

Only God knows that and judges the person accordingly. This is precisely why we do not judge the souls of others.

Okay. Fair enough. Why did you respond positively to the message of the Gospel?

Same can be said for you especially seeing how you will mis-state what we say 5 minutes after we have said it.

Really? Where did I do that?

Yep, see? we aren't THAT different.

Your beliefs and my beliefs are closer than mine and a Mormon's. That doesn't mean they aren't that different.

First you say we are that different now you say "the only difference is..." anyway, I agree with you here Don, we do not differ on this point.

This is what I'm talking about. Right here you acknowledge that we don't differ on this point but it doesn't stop you from acting as if I'm being wishy washy. There is one thing that you seem to have failed to notice. I DID NOT say, "the only difference is..." I said, "the only difference between you and I IN THIS AREA is..."

Here we go, lets see if this will finally sink in, NO I DO NOT! God choose man first, if God did not, man's only destiny would be hell.

Does God choose man's destiny Michelle? Or do you just believe that God makes both Heaven and hell a possible destination for all people and then leaves it to man to decide between the two? If you agree with the latter, as you have many, many times, then you ARE purporting that man chooses his own destiny.

The Catholic Church teaches theoretically speaking. The Church has never condemned any soul to hell. We have no idea the extent of God mercy on the souls who leave this world and stand before Him to be judged. There is nothing in the bible or tradition that says any one soul has gone to hell. We certainly believe hell is a reality but we have no real evidence biblical or other wise to say any human soul is occupying hell. Does that mean no one is there? No, it means we can not dare pass judgement on what Christ was silent about.

"What Christ was silent about?!" Your church has neither the authority nor the power to condemn anyone to hell. Even though we are ignorant as to who God's chosen are as well as who are forever His enemy the Bible is rife with clear examples of people who will inherit the domain of the father of all sin. What about Judas Iscariot? For goodness sakes Michelle, he's called the "son of perdition." "Perdition" means eternal damnation. Judas is but one of many examples in the Bible of enemies of God and His people. Where do you think those people go, Heaven?

Are you saying you know for a fact that souls are in hell? If so, cite please. We know that hell has occupants but we do not know as fact that they are human souls.

Are you asking me if there are verses that say, "Yes, this particular person is currently residing in hell?" Or are you merely asking for biblical evidence that people go to hell?

We say theoretically speaking that the souls of the wicked will end up there but we do not dare say who is or who isn't already there.

Great. I'm not asking you to name names. We can be general. I will. All the people whose sins were not atoned for by the blood of Christ will go to hell.

Where, where does the gospel of Christ say that? Show me.

Why? Would you believe as I do? It's contrary to what your church teaches so it would be folly for me to even take the time to provide any Scriptural support for my beliefs. In discussions with you I start off with three strikes because I don't submit to the beliefs of your leaders.

It doesn't take a mad rocket scientist genius to figure that when you explain something 10,000 times to a person and the person still will turn around and mis-state what was explained that something must be up.

By all means, if you feel that the godly approach to my continued ignorance is to assume that something's up, then continue to justify such behavior. You need not answer to me.

Silly girl? Watch your temper now.

No one's mad Michelle. Stop assuming so much. I rarely get mad when debating with you because when I start to feel anger I bow out. You, of course, consider this a sign of my inability to refute you but I know that it is far wiser to disengage than pull the trigger and give into those carnal desires.

Can you cite what you know Don, and then cite the source of how you came to now it?

Sure, try anything between Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21 and it was by the mercy and grace of God. That do for you? I doubt it will considering it doesn't have the Catholic imprimatur on it.

Did they freely choose sin?

Of course.

If so how come we can't freely choose it now?

Who is "we?" If, by "we," you mean humanity, we can, and do, freely choose it. If, by "we," you mean unregenerate (I know you don't submit to this term) then I would tell you that sin is all they can choose because sin is all they want.

And don't give me the illogical explanation that defies all laws of common sense and logic by saying unregenerated man is free to choose what is in line with his nature. Free will means to choose between the two, in this case good and evil, not the one.

I'm not sure if I'm happy or sad that something I believe seems illogical to you. I don't find your beliefs to be very logical myself. Either way, unregenerate man does choose between two choices, those being to obey or to disobey. However, unregenerate man's sinful inclinations dictate his actions because his greatest desire is to always rebel. So, despite the fact that you think it's illogical, unregenerate man freely, that is, of his own volition, chooses to sin instead of obey.

So why does he control them now?

He doesn't, at least not in the sense you're alluding to. Unregenerate man's own fallen nature controls him. That is what is meant when the Bible says that man is a slave to his sin and in bondage to that sinful nature.

Is there any particular reason God choose to allow man to completely die knowing all the while He won't save but just a few of them?

Let me first note that I have no idea what you mean by "completely die," nor do I understand where you got the idea that God will only save a few fallen people. Neither of these are things that I have ever purported. I have no clue how many the Lord has chosen. Additionally, the "death in trespasses and sins" is not indicative of destruction but rather a total disinclination to anything of God. Man retained a soul after the Fall but that soul was corrupted to the point that there was no part of him that was not enslaved to sin. As for why God ordained that man would fall from grace, I've already said. He sovereignly governed this cataclysmic event so that He would be glorified in mercifully setting a people apart unto His Son and revealing Himself to the world through them that they may see His power and holy majesty.

Is there any reason at all you can give that will tell us why God had to do it this way?

God did not have to do it this way. It happens to be the way that God chose to do it. I can only guess that He so chose this way because it brought Him the most glory.

And this is the sickest part of your theology if you don't mind me saying.

Why would I mind being told such a godly thing? Not at all Michelle, not at all.

The most unmerciful belief floating out there. So If God cut your legs off and damns you because you can not run, he is glorified?? Okay...

LOL! And you say I misrepresent your ideas. How classic! LOL!

Well what else would His plan revolved around Don?

This, in a nutshell, is the saddest part of your beliefs, if you don't mind me saying so. His plan, like all things, is created to bring Him glory. It revolves around Him Michelle, Him.

He created man for what purpose? To **** them? Give me a break. Jesus Christ is His glory. Not ****** men, nor saved men but Jesus Christ's obedience and perfection coming in humanity is His glory. It is not about us, it is about HIM.

I really wish you believed it was about Him. Your statements say otherwise. All things are to the glory of the Lord. Don't you think it glorifies God to exact His righteous wrath against the sinfulness of man? Don't you think it glorifies God to be merciful and exalt His children for the sake of His holy Son?

We believe "Oh happy fall of Adam who won for us a savior." The mercy of God shown through Christ and because of Christ is why he allowed the fall.

The mercy of God against who? When you answer this question you'll see who you acknowledge as the center of God's plan. The wonderfulness of the Gospel is that Christ is exalted. It's that He is glorified. Yes, it's also wonderful that we benefit from His obedience but that is quite secondary to the glory of God in the Highest.

And the lack of good any one of us would do if we were not allowed to suffer.

So, being that you, as a finite creation, can acknowledge that the good that is done by those that claim allegience to the Lord Almighty brings glory to Him and shows the fallen world His holiness and mercy, don't you think that God, an infinite being, would recognize this? If so, don't you think it makes sense for God to sovereignly bring the Fall to pass through the sinful volition of His creation?

Nope.

Okay.

Of course.

Okay.

Nope.

Got to admit, you've thrown me for a loop on this one. I'll play along. To whom does God NOT give the grace to embrace Him?

To make us capable of response.

So God's purpose in giving grace is not that we would embrace Him, but merely that we could embrace Him?

Yep.

Okay.

It does, so this is mute.

Let me help you out here. I think the word you're looking for is "moot."

His desire.

Um...I'm not sure how this is an answer. I asked, "Do you believe it is God's will that every person ever created be saved?" You answered, "His desire." Do you mean that it is His desire that every person ever created be saved?

He desires that all should live.

Is there a difference between what God wills and what God desires? Is God confused? Why would God desire something but not will it?

God is indifferent to those who are evil.

Really? Are you sure "indifferent" is the word you meant to use:

indifferent:
1 : marked by impartiality : UNBIASED
2 a : that does not matter one way or the other b : of no importance or value one way or the other
3 a : marked by no special liking for or dislike of something <indifferent about which task he was given> b : marked by a lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern for something : APATHETIC <indifferent to suffering and poverty>
4 : being neither excessive nor inadequate : MODERATE <hills of indifferent size>

Do you think that accurately expresses God's feelings towards those that are evil?

I am surprised that you think God has the feelings and emotions of humans.

You're kidding, right? Michelle, the overwhelming theme to your posts is the personification of God.

Why can't he allow us the free will to turn away from Him and give ourselves over to evil if He can bring glory from that?

He does. In fact, that is our natural, and only, inclination in our regenerate state. For some God leaves them to that. For others, He is merciful and gives them a heart that longs to obey Him. He is glorified both ways because things work out exactly the way He wants them to in both cases. In the case of those He elects unto salvation He is glorified in His mercy. In the case of those He leaves to their fallenness He is glorified in His righteous judgment.

What is with you thinking God HAS to be the one to make the choice? Not the choice to give the necessary graces, nor the choice to choose us first but the choice to simply choose evil over the good that he afforded us the grace to be able to choose against?

Well Michelle, unlike you, I am under no dellusion as to man's naturally depraved inclination to rebel. Also, I never said we don't make the choice. I just said that God's grace in regenerating us (taking out our heart of stone and giving us a heart of flesh) is so sufficient to incline us to Him that all who have been regenerated do respond in faith.

Again, if you agree with this, then what is the problem with our paradigm? Why is it unacceptable to you?

Because it presuposes man's willful autonomy and sets us up as boasters of our salvation. I am sure you will deny this but it is fundemental to your entire theology. If you disagree then tell me what is the reason that you, personally, embraced the Gospel. To say that it was the grace of God is to say what I say, and I know you can't have that. To say that you saw the merit in embracing the grace of God is to boast in your own intelligence.

Man is not born inherently evil and there is no biblical support that says he is. On this your whole paradigm will hang and when you bring babies into this, it goes out the window.

Okay Michelle. You and I have argued this point more times that I desire to remember. I won't do it again. All I will say is that when one denies the biblical truth of man's fallen depravity and starts with the assumption that man retained some "island of righteousness" after the Fall then the views that logically follow are those that you embrace.

I do have one question though. Earlier you stated that we are unable to respond to God apart from His grace and that we are helpless in our sin apart from God's grace. If you acknowledge both of those qualities of fallen man how can you deny man's inherent evil?

If you agree then what is the big hang up you have with free will?

My "big hang up" with your usage of "free will" is that you subjegate the plan of God to having to work around or in response to human action. All you do is acknowledge that God is able to turn our evil to good. You completely negate God's sovereign government of His creation by the granting/withholding of His grace. This makes God nothing more than some powerful being that plays catch up to make his plan work out like he wanted.

Everyone is born God's child and is inherently good, just look at babies, Don, because they were made by His hands but when a man chooses evil that sin has brought to the soul and God allows the evil to over come Him He is no longer a child of God but one of the devil. That is what I argued.

So we start out inherently good and then turn into a sinner because we sin? We're not born with a sinful nature? So, before, when you agreed that we are helpless in our sin you were really just talking about people other than children? Let me get this straight. We're born children of God. Through sin we lose our place in God's family and become a member of satan's family. Then, through baptism, we once again become a child of God? And then if we commit a mortal sin we, once again, lose our place in God's family. Then, if we repent we, once again, become a child of God. And so on. Is that accurate or is that an unintentional misinterpretation of your beliefs?

Let me rephrase because I know how you enjoy trapping people in their words and twisting there meaning.

Wow.

So you are saying you have a problem with what the gospel itself says?

LOL!!! Wow. That I should see the day when a Catholic says that the Gospel should speak clearly enough that I should just be able to read it plainly. "What the Gospel Itself says?" LOL! Man, that's a good one Michelle. Does your Bible talk to you? My kids have some books that talk to them if they press certain buttons but my Bible doesn't do that.

You think it should have been worded differently? It says what it says and shoomse it all you want, when the day is over it will still say that GO SO LOVED THE WORLD.

It also says "You hate all workers of iniquity." Funny, you don't want to just submit to "what the Gospel Itself says" when it's contrary to what you believe. Then we need some living Apostle and special grace. Then what the Gospel plainly says isn't enough. You see Michelle, I operate under the belief that God gave us Scripture and that since it's from God it must be cohesive. Therefore, we must interpret Scripture in light of Scripture. When reading Scripture there are a number of things we must consider if we wish to responsibly and accurately understand, i.e., linguistics, context (immediate and exhaustive), audience, time frame, speaker, literary style, etc. So, when we read, "For God so loved the world..." we may immediately be of the impression that it means, due to the word kosmos, that it means that God loves the physical planet earth. Of course, this is probably not the intent of the verse due to immediate context. So, due to linguistics and immediate context we come to the conclusion that kosmos is most likely a reference to people. Now, when we read John 3:16 and then recall that Psalms 5:5 says that God "hates all workers of iniquity" we are in a dilemma. We can either believe that there is no continuity between Psalms and the Book of John, making God the author of confusion, or, we can look for an alternate meaning of either sane' (hate, Ps. 5:5), agapao (loved, John 3:16) or kosmos (world, John 3:16).

Let's start with sane':

1) to hate, be hateful
a) (Qal) to hate
1) of man
2) of God
3) hater, one hating, enemy (participle) (subst)
b) (Niphal) to be hated
c) (Piel) hater (participle)
1) of persons, nations, God, wisdom

I think that's pretty much hate. How about agapao:

1) of persons
a) to welcome, to entertain, to be fond of, to love dearly
2) of things
a) to be well pleased, to be contented at or with a thing

I doubt either of us would disagree that agapao, at least in this instance, means to love dearly.

At this point we see that Scripture has said that God hates some people, i.e., workers of iniquity, and loves others. Who are the others? Scripture has shown that it cannot be everyone. That would pit one section of Scripture against another and then be content to let them contradict each other. I'm not prepared to do that. You may be. That is, of course, your perrogative.

Now we come to kosmos. It turns out that this word has quite a few different usages in the Bible, approximately eleven. One of those usages is "the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family," which is how you use it if I'm not mistaken, and another is "of believers only," which is how I use it here. So, we're faced with a choice. Do we submit to the clearly revealed Word that God does not love every single person or do we maintain that in light of Scripture that directly refutes it? The choice is yours.

Exactly.

No.

So as long as there is breath in their body they still can turn from evil and repent but if God knows when He creates them that they won't repent then it's not possible for them to repent? Okay.

Accept for how He can choose us but allow us to turn away and he still be glorified, successful and sovereign, right?

Michelle, illogical thoughts never make sense to me.

God bless

Dominus Fidelis · Mar 4, 2004

Michelle, illogical thoughts never make sense to me.

Don-

Do you realize that ad hominem attacks in a debate are themselves considered illogical fallacies? Calling our beliefs sad, and calling Michelle delusional, etc is illogical.

Benedicta00 · Mar 4, 2004

Defens0rFidei said:
Don-

Do you realize that ad hominem attacks in a debate are themselves considered illogical fallacies? Calling our beliefs sad, and calling Michelle delusional, etc is illogical.

Well, in all fairness I did call his sick first in this thread.

Benedicta00 · Mar 4, 2004

Reformationist said:
Of course. That's not the point. The point was, you were purporting that our views could be reconciled. I was clarifying that unless they change they cannot be reconciled. All we can do is agree to disagree.

Only two points of them would need to change and that would take you looking at them from a different prospective until then we will have to agree to disagree.

Well kudos to you. Just remember, if I blatantly misrepresent your theology it's not malicious.

Never once did I say I thought you did out of malice.

Michelle, you're the one who said, "God does not choose us, we chose Him." All I did was provide Scripture that directly contradicted that statement. In John 15:16 Jesus clearly states that He chose us, we did not choose Him.

Okay, great. But I'm not "putting words in your mouth." That's a direct quote of what you said in post #57. Take a look for yourself. "God does not choose us, we chose Him."

If this was a type, so be it. However, by saying that I'm "putting words in your mouth" you are bearing false witness against me, not vice versa.

I apologize, it was a mistake.

So His grace enables us to respond to His choice but does not ensure that we will respond positively. That's what you believe, right?

No He does not force the choice to go only way, that would violate free will. Free will is the power to choose between the two opposites.

Okay. Fair enough. Why did you respond positively to the message of the Gospel?

I am sure there are several reasons that softened my heart, which we consider those graces but really and truly, I look forward to the answer to this in the world to come.

Really? Where did I do that?

You will do it in almost every thread you talk to another Catholic in.

Your beliefs and my beliefs are closer than mine and a Mormon's. That doesn't mean they aren't that different.

Duh.

This is what I'm talking about. Right here you acknowledge that we don't differ on this point but it doesn't stop you from acting as if I'm being wishy washy. There is one thing that you seem to have failed to notice. I DID NOT say, "the only difference is..." I said, "the only difference between you and I IN THIS AREA is..."

And there are only two areas that cause the problems and in these areas it is all how you see it.

Does God choose man's destiny Michelle? Or do you just believe that God makes both Heaven and hell a possible destination for all people and then leaves it to man to decide between the two? If you agree with the latter, as you have many, many times, then you ARE purporting that man chooses his own destiny.

Man chooses his destiny to a certain extent. If God did not afford the grace to him, he would have only one choice, so no He really does not choose it from his own accord. So as I said before, it isn't all or nothing with God. He does both, He chooses and he allows us to choose also. It is mystery and so we do not try to understand it.

"What Christ was silent about?!" Your church has neither the authority nor the power to condemn anyone to hell. Even though we are ignorant as to who God's chosen are as well as who are forever His enemy the Bible is rife with clear examples of people who will inherit the domain of the father of all sin. What about Judas Iscariot? For goodness sakes Michelle, he's called the "son of perdition." "Perdition" means eternal damnation. Judas is but one of many examples in the Bible of enemies of God and His people. Where do you think those people go, Heaven?

The Church does not say who is condemned with certainly and ho isn't because after death, no one is standing at judgement with them, we do not know the extent of God's mercy given to a soul. Please cite for me the scripture where it says that Judas is a son of hell? This could very well mean that he acted as such which the Church certainly does not disagree, but I do not recall any place in the bible where it says Judas went to hell.

Are you asking me if there are verses that say, "Yes, this particular person is currently residing in hell?" Or are you merely asking for biblical evidence that people go to hell?

As I will have to say again, we believe hell is realty and people most certainly can go there but we have no confirmation as fact that anyone is actually there. This is not to say that no one is, I believe there may be souls there, but it is to say that we do not know this as fact.

Great. I'm not asking you to name names. We can be general. I will. All the people whose sins were not atoned for by the blood of Christ will go to hell.

But all sin was atoned for. Divine justice was satisfied, do you disagree that divine justice for sin was satisfied?

Why? Would you believe as I do? It's contrary to what your church teaches so it would be folly for me to even take the time to provide any Scriptural support for my beliefs. In discussions with you I start off with three strikes because I don't submit to the beliefs of your leaders.

Right... because it simply is not there- it is read into it. I would have to be indoctrinated into your belief system, believe it and then I can read the scriptures and glean this, but only after I have been trained.

By all means, if you feel that the godly approach to my continued ignorance is to assume that something's up, then continue to justify such behavior. You need not answer to me.

Stop directing attention away from the subject. If I thought you were being malicious I would not even bother, maybe I think you are better than that, maybe I am holding you to a higher standard because I think you are better than that.

No one's mad Michelle. Stop assuming so much. I rarely get mad when debating with you because when I start to feel anger I bow out. You, of course, consider this a sign of my inability to refute you but I know that it is far wiser to disengage than pull the trigger and give into those carnal desires.

Insulting me, calling me "silly girl" was unnecessary Don, I am 36 years old, I am not a girl. Even if you are angry, you are grown and should be able to control that and not have to bow out. But if the only way to control yourself is to take the high road then I guess you are doing the right thing. (Why do all these discussions with you turn personal?)

Sure, try anything between Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21 and it was by the mercy and grace of God. That do for you? I doubt it will considering it doesn't have the Catholic imprimatur on it.

Now we are enter sarcasm. I understand, you can't cite, you just want to argue opinion and in a formal debate this would be totally unacceptable, you would lose.

Who is "we?" If, by "we," you mean humanity, we can, and do, freely choose it. If, by "we," you mean unregenerate (I know you don't submit to this term) then I would tell you that sin is all they can choose because sin is all they want.

And you know this based on fact? You know Don, lived human experience says differently. I know many according to you "unregenerated" people who don't always choose sin and I know some unregenerated people who choose sin far less than me. This, from a psychological as well as spiritual standpoint is absolutely false and unproven.

I'm not sure if I'm happy or sad that something I believe seems illogical to you. I don't find your beliefs to be very logical myself. Either way, unregenerate man does choose between two choices, those being to obey or to disobey. However, unregenerate man's sinful inclinations dictate his actions because his greatest desire is to always rebel. So, despite the fact that you think it's illogical, unregenerate man freely, that is, of his own volition, chooses to sin instead of obey.

You just pointed out to us the illogic in it. Man can choose to obey and disobey but he will ultimately choose to disobey. You have no way of knowing what is in a person's heart. You can in no way say why a person chooses evil or why a person chooses good. Do you realize that some children grow up abused and molested beyond anything I know I could comprehend, and all they were taught was to live a lifestyle of sin and not one of holiness, you are going to tell me it is because God choose to not give them any graces or mercy just so he can **** them just so he can be glory?

You are only assuming that God doesn't allow a person mercy, you are only assuming and trying to find a reason for the evil in the world. There are many factors why we choose evil over good with only God really knowing why. This is precisely why we do not judge the souls of others, we did not walk in their shoes and experience what they did.

Yes there are people who are just plain evil but I can't read their heart only God can and again, I know some who do obey better than me, and they by no means are regenerated according to you, lived human experience would disagree with you.

He doesn't, at least not in the sense you're alluding to. Unregenerate man's own fallen nature controls him. That is what is meant when the Bible says that man is a slave to his sin and in bondage to that sinful nature.

No, this is wrong. Man is a slave to his own desires and passions, he knows what is right but is to weak to do what is right as Paul clearly says as plain as day, I don't do they good I want but I do the evil I don't want. We are wounded, weak people now, not completely destroyed people. People are not born into this world inherently evil. They are still good but disordered, sick wounded in need of redemption and healing.

Let me first note that I have no idea what you mean by "completely die," nor do I understand where you got the idea that God will only save a few fallen people. Neither of these are things that I have ever purported. I have no clue how many the Lord has chosen. Additionally, the "death in trespasses and sins"

Where do you get that it means that men are inherently evil? Where does this say that? It says we are dead in our sins, that our sins merit hell and we will go to hell when we physically die if we are not redeemed.

is not indicative of destruction but rather a total disinclination to anything of God.

That is false. You are reading that into the verse, it is not there Don.

Man retained a soul after the Fall but that soul was corrupted to the point that there was no part of him that was not enslaved to sin.

False, you are reading into the text, it isn't there.

As for why God ordained that man would fall from grace, I've already said. He sovereignly governed this cataclysmic event so that He would be glorified in mercifully setting a people apart unto His Son and revealing Himself to the world through them that they may see His power and holy majesty.

He is only mercy if He sets a certain amount aside and forces them to be saved? Do I have this right? Where do you glean this from scripture? Where is the verse that says all this?

God did not have to do it this way. It happens to be the way that God chose to do it. I can only guess that He so chose this way because it brought Him the most glory.

****** people bring him glory? Having them under your paradigm with no help to be saved and then watching them go to where they had no control over going, brings him glory? And you do not see the ridiculousness of this?

Doesn't it make a little more sense that if He gave a person mercy and grace and then they choose evil and then he showed justice He would be glorified and much much more sovereign?

This will have to be cont.

Benedicta00 · Mar 4, 2004

Why would I mind being told such a godly thing? Not at all Michelle, not at all.

I never minded when you called us "man centered" and used the sick icon to show you feelings about your misconception about what we believe.

LOL! And you say I misrepresent your ideas. How classic! LOL!

Well then correct me Don and don't try to mock a person.

This, in a nutshell, is the saddest part of your beliefs, if you don't mind me saying so. His plan, like all things, is created to bring Him glory. It revolves around Him Michelle, Him.

I agree it does, can you explain to me how under our paradigm, it doesn't? All you ever do is accuse but you never break it down and explain to us why you think this.

I really wish you believed it was about Him. Your statements say otherwise. All things are to the glory of the Lord. Don't you think it glorifies God to exact His righteous wrath against the sinfulness of man? Don't you think it glorifies God to be merciful and exalt His children for the sake of His holy Son?

I believe exactly that Don. But I do not think rationally that God would have to make the fight unfair in order to be glorified.

The mercy of God against who? When you answer this question you'll see who you acknowledge as the center of God's plan. The wonderfulness of the Gospel is that Christ is exalted. It's that He is glorified. Yes, it's also wonderful that we benefit from His obedience but that is quite secondary to the glory of God in the Highest.

Where does the scriptures say that Christ is second in line to bring Him glory and dammed souls who didn't have a fighting chance are first?

Christ paid the debet of sin to the father. It was between Him and God. So mercy has arrived because Jesus stepped up and took the whole debt onto Himself. Because Christ died and God was satisfied, He has NO REASON to be mad at the human race, He can be merciful to all men but all men are, JUST AS ADAM WASN'T, not obligated to be saved. God affords the graces and mercy that came to the WORLD through Jesus Christ. If a man turns away from this grace, then God is not the loser because CHRIST DIED. Get it now? There is satisfaction.

So, being that you, as a finite creation, can acknowledge that the good that is done by those that claim allegience to the Lord Almighty brings glory to Him and shows the fallen world His holiness and mercy, don't you think that God, an infinite being, would recognize this? If so, don't you think it makes sense for God to sovereignly bring the Fall to pass through the sinful volition of His creation?

I don't agree that this is the reason why we do good is so the unsaved can see how merciful God is to us. They aren't saved and capable of knowing good according to you, so how would they even recognize it?

Got to admit, you've thrown me for a loop on this one. I'll play along. To whom does God NOT give the grace to embrace Him?

So God's purpose in giving grace is not that we would embrace Him, but merely that we could embrace Him?

He seeks us but we can not see Him, so He gives us the grace to see Him. We can always after seeing Him close our eyes, this is free will. We can never see Him because we can choose to keep them closed. When you close your curtains in your room, does it mean the sun is not shinning into the window or does it mean that you did something to prevent it from coming in? Is God's justice thwarted? No, Christ died. Do you think Christ's death was not powerful enough to pay the debt TO GOD for the offenses that were committed against Him? Do you think if Christ is limited to just paying our debt in a individual sense? Do you think that He is capable of satisfying justice? Do you think justice is only forgiving the sinner?

Um...I'm not sure how this is an answer. I asked, "Do you believe it is God's will that every person ever created be saved?" You answered, "His desire." Do you mean that it is His desire that every person ever created be saved?

I believe it is part of His will. The other part is that we accept salvation freely and not forced.

Is there a difference between what God wills and what God desires? Is God confused? Why would God desire something but not will it?

That is what we keep asking you.

Really? Are you sure "indifferent" is the word you meant to use:

indifferent:
1 : marked by impartiality : UNBIASED
2 a : that does not matter one way or the other b : of no importance or value one way or the other
3 a : marked by no special liking for or dislike of something <indifferent about which task he was given> b : marked by a lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern for something : APATHETIC <indifferent to suffering and poverty>
4 : being neither excessive nor inadequate : MODERATE <hills of indifferent size>

Do you think that accurately expresses God's feelings towards those that are evil?

Since you love to quote Webster, do me a favor, look up Free Will. Let's see if it gives your definition.

You're kidding, right? Michelle, the overwhelming theme to your posts is the personification of God.

You are asking me if I know how God feels, don't you think this is a little silly? I do not know how God feels.

He does. In fact, that is our natural, and only, inclination in our regenerate state. For some God leaves them to that.

After they have seen His mercy, glory, and justice and choose it.

For others, He is merciful and gives them a heart that longs to obey Him.

Those, who after He has shown it to them, accept it.

He is glorified both ways because things work out exactly the way He wants them to in both cases.

The part that you are not getting that is very disturbing is that it works out because God sets up a situation where a soul that HE created had no chance from the get go. This is sick. Only a sick demented God would be sick enough to make a person, put Him in the lives of other people who love Him and refuse to give Him what is needed to be saved and just **** him and say, "look at how glorified I am, I just ****** someone who had no chance anyway." What glory is there in that, cutting off someones legs and then condemning them because they can't run?

In the case of those He elects unto salvation He is glorified in His mercy. In the case of those He leaves to their fallenness He is glorified in His righteous judgment.

Exactly, how does someone accepting or rejecting change this in anyway?

Benedicta00 · Mar 4, 2004

Well Michelle, unlike you, I am under no dellusion as to man's naturally depraved inclination to rebel. Also, I never said we don't make the choice. I just said that God's grace in regenerating us (taking out our heart of stone and giving us a heart of flesh) is so sufficient to incline us to Him that all who have been regenerated do respond in faith.

Look up free will; see if it says that. This is flawed logic and a grave misuse of the word free will.

it presuposes man's willful autonomy and sets us up as boasters of our salvation.

Only in your eyes because you were trained to believe this. Because you bought this when it was sold to you. Not all of Christians, in fact the majority, fall for this view. You dont have to be Catholic to disagree with this one.

I am sure you will deny this but it is fundemental to your entire theology. If you disagree then tell me what is the reason that you, personally, embraced the Gospel.

When I die, you will be the first I visit and I will let you know providing God see fit to even let me know.

To say that it was the grace of God is to say what I say, and I know you can't have that. To say that you saw the merit in embracing the grace of God is to boast in your own intelligence.

Well I don't think this so you point it MUTE. I know God gave me the grace to embrace but why I did not run from it as some do, I don't know.

Okay Michelle. You and I have argued this point more times that I desire to remember. I won't do it again. All I will say is that when one denies the biblical truth of man's fallen depravity and starts with the assumption that man retained some "island of righteousness" after the Fall then the views that logically follow are those that you embrace.

Nope. This is a false understanding of what we believe. It is because God enlightened us to Himself and he gave us the grace to accept Him. He also allowed the choice to reject Him. Nothing to do with my intelligence or goodness or anything like that.

I do have one question though. Earlier you stated that we are unable to respond to God apart from His grace and that we are helpless in our sin apart from God's grace. If you acknowledge both of those qualities of fallen man how can you deny man's inherent evil?

Because we aren't. Man is helpless and is made to feel as though he is bound with chains to his passions and desires but he is still able to make a choice, with out grace, he won't make the right choice. How does this mean he is evil if God gives him a choice between good and evil and the grace to choose good?

My "big hang up" with your usage of "free will" is that you subjegate the plan of God to having to work around or in response to human action.

But if that is okay with God, then why isnt it with you? Besides, He is not left working around us. He knows how everything is going to play out and He allows this, it is His choice to allow us free will and to use our free will choices in His plan. God is so powerful that he will work it all out in the end.

All you do is acknowledge that God is able to turn our evil to good. You completely negate God's sovereign government of His creation by the granting/withholding of His grace.

There is no scripture that says He withholds grace.

This makes God nothing more than some powerful being that plays catch up to make his plan work out like he wanted.

As long as you keep thinking of it this way. God ordains that we have the graces to follow Him in what ever light He may give to us, He ordains that we be able to reject this if we choose for what ever reason, only God knows and that is why we can not assume that this is wrong somehow because only God knows why this is important to Him. He also ordains to use these choices in His plan and He is so powerful He will work it all out for the ultimate good and for His ultimate glory. I trust Him Don, that he can do both and have it work out. Choose us and allows us to choose him back after he afford us the grace to do so.

So we start out inherently good and then turn into a sinner because we sin?

Exactly. Look at your kids under the cognitive age to be able to choose evil or good, and tell me it isnt so. They may be born with original sin but they are innocent of any personal, committed, willful, evil.

We're not born with a sinful nature?

Yes, our nature leans towards sin, does this automatically mean we are evil to the core? There is that all or nothing thinking again.

So, before, when you agreed that we are helpless in our sin you were really just talking about people other than children?

None of us can overcome sin unless God helps us with grace.

Let me get this straight. We're born children of God. Through sin we lose our place in God's family and become a member of satan's family.

Yep.

Then, through baptism, we once again become a child of God?

No. You are missing the point but yet, I know I have told you this before...

We are all born with original sin so we are all cut off from God. Baptism removes original sin and any personal sin you may have at the time of baptism.

your personal sins before baptism is irrelevant, once you are baptized, you are born again, you are a new creation, no longer with original sin or personal sin but before baptism, your personal sins really did not matter, because you were condemned, DEAD IN SIN, because of original sin. So basically as I said before, we are that different because these you would call the unregenerated people, those who are not redeemed from Adams sin and so any good they do will not profit them in Gods eyes. We dont think any differently except that we do not say that God arbitrarily chooses to leave them unregenerated just so he can be glorified and we dont say a unregenerated man is so evil to the core he will always and only choose evil.

And then if we commit a mortal sin we, once again, lose our place in God's family.

No you never ever lose your place in God's family. But I know I have told you this before...

You move out but your place is always there waiting for you to return. insert prodigal son story here.

Then, if we repent we, once again, become a child of God.

No, you are always a child of God but if you repent you move back home. Insert prodigal son story here.

And so on. Is that accurate or is that an unintentional misinterpretation of your beliefs?

If you are baptized and you repudiate the Christian faith altogether you are considered a child of the devil if you are this way unto death. Problem is we can only speak theoretically because we have no way of knowing who will repute faith unto death and who won't.

Wow.

Indeed.

LOL!!! Wow. That I should see the day when a Catholic says that the Gospel should speak clearly enough that I should just be able to read it plainly. "What the Gospel Itself says?" LOL! Man, that's a good one Michelle. Does your Bible talk to you? My kids have some books that talk to them if they press certain buttons but my Bible doesn't do that.

Get over I never said that. You are saying you think it was written wrongly, yes or no?

It also says "You hate all workers of iniquity." Funny, you don't want to just submit to "what the Gospel Itself says" when it's contrary to what you believe.

I do not ignore this verses. Those are the children of the devil. The ones who are workers of iniquity.

Then we need some living Apostle and special grace.

What nonsense are you talking about now? There is no apostle that is alive.

Then what the Gospel plainly says isn't enough. You see Michelle, I operate under the belief that God gave us Scripture and that since it's from God it must be cohesive. Therefore, we must interpret Scripture in light of Scripture.

Who told you that? And why do you trust them? The scriptures do not say that.

When reading Scripture there are a number of things we must consider if we wish to responsibly and accurately understand, i.e., linguistics, context (immediate and exhaustive), audience, time frame, speaker, literary style, etc.

Catholics agree.

So, when we read, "For God so loved the world..." we may immediately be of the impression that it means, due to the word kosmos, that it means that God loves the physical planet earth. Of course, this is probably not the intent of the verse due to immediate context. So, due to linguistics and immediate context we come to the conclusion that kosmos is most likely a reference to people. Now, when we read John 3:16 and then recall that Psalms 5:5 says that God "hates all workers of iniquity" we are in a dilemma. We can either believe that there is no continuity between Psalms and the Book of John, making God the author of confusion, or, we can look for an alternate meaning of either sane' (hate, Ps. 5:5), agapao (loved, John 3:16) or kosmos (world, John 3:16).

Don, there are Catholic theologians who also study languages and all that jazz and interpret scripture within the context of Catholic teaching, so again all this serves to show is that the bible is quite subjective to the person interpreting it. All the more reason why we need a magisteriuim with teaching authority given it by God. So we can know objectively what is truth.

At this point we see that Scripture has said that God hates some people, i.e., workers of iniquity, and loves others.

I don't disagree.

Who are the others? Scripture has shown that it cannot be everyone. That would pit one section of Scripture against another and then be content to let them contradict each other. I'm not prepared to do that. You may be. That is, of course, your perrogative.

Don, we agree that there are the elect and there are the reprobates. Those he loves and hates.

Now we come to kosmos. It turns out that this word has quite a few different usages in the Bible, approximately eleven. One of those usages is "the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family," which is how you use it if I'm not mistaken, and another is "of believers only," which is how I use it here. So, we're faced with a choice. Do we submit to the clearly revealed Word that God does not love every single person or do we maintain that in light of Scripture that directly refutes it? The choice is yours.

If you have believed what ever theologian has concluded that, the choice is yours but there are Catholic theologians who may have a different opinion, who do we believe and why? The bible can be very subjective according to whos hands it falls into.

So as long as there is breath in their body they still can turn from evil and repent but if God knows when He creates them that they won't repent then it's not possible for them to repent? Okay.

In the course of their life as it plays out they always have the choice to repent. After all is said and done when it's over they choose not to unto death, then it isn't possible and God know the answer, not us. Does this mean that during the course of the person's life they didn't have the choice? No, Don. It doesn't.

Michelle, illogical thoughts never make sense to me.

Obviously they do, you think God dams on purpose to be glorified.

Does God already know who is going to be saved and who won't?

ScottBot is Stalking Me!

Koine addict

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Koine addict

dnich163

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

ScottBot is Stalking Me!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency