Is Calvinism a heresy?

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
I do mean that, as explained here:
"Dogma" is the highest category of Church teaching and is reserved for what God reveals - hold your horses, this is not confined to holy scripture - "the teaching of the Church is the teaching of Christ" is a well known statement in Catholic theology. It means that the Church is the body of Christ and when she (this is a reference to her as Christ's bride) speaks she speaks with his words. Catholics teach and believe that Christ continues to speak in and by the Church to the world and to the faithful. This is not a claim to speak under inspiration. That gift is confined to holy scripture. And in the hierarchy of revealed truth holy scripture is the summit.​
How is that not self-contradictory? You said that you DO mean that Scripture and Dogma are of equal authority. Then, below that, you say, (somewhat poetically, it seems to me), that in the hierarchy of revealed truth, holy scripture is the summit. If the Scriptures are indeed the Word of God, my conscience and my understanding and my behavior are governed by it, (with or without my cooperation, come to think of it). The church's dogma, on the other hand, even if the church is the pillar and ground of truth, has no authority over my conscience. In the end, like Martin Luther, I answer to God alone. And even now, I have direct access to the Father through Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Only God has truly free will.
Exactly. I would add, "and those to whom he chooses to give it".
And I believe that God chose to give it to his human creation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jameslouise
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
How is that not self-contradictory?
Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church - it is not inspired, it is not Dogma, it has significant authority, possibly at a level similar to the WCF in a conservative Presbyterian denomination - and take a look at the Dogmas that it quotes.

I do not write these posts with the intention of converting anyone. I would welcome a genuine conversion should one arise. My intention is to discuss and to present Catholic views in a place where they are only occasionally heard (general theology) and to people who, on the whole, do not know them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark Quayle
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Exactly. I would add, "and those to whom he chooses to give it".
And I believe that God chose to give it to his human creation.
Sounds like another contradiction. You say "exactly" to 'only God has truly free will'. Then you say "and those to whom he chooses to give it. If he can give it to others, then they have it, no? Thus, NOT only God has truly free will, if I follow what you are saying.

I find a logical fault at the point of God giving them " 'free' will". God has it because it is his to have, as first cause. But for him to give it to someone else, they are also, first cause, if it is still at all truly free. Yet even that is denied, because if he gave it to them, THAT is caused, and anything descending from it, such as choices, are still caused. But I know, you don't mean 'free will' in the same way as God has free will —I think you don't anyway; you said as much some posts back.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Sounds like another contradiction. You say "exactly" to 'only God has truly free will'. Then you say "and those to whom he chooses to give it. If he can give it to others, then they have it, no? Thus, NOT only God has truly free will, if I follow what you are saying.
What I intended is, "God alone has truly free will along with those to whom he chooses to give it". It is rather like the proposition, "God alone has true life along with those to whom he chooses to give it". I want to note once more that what humanity has as free will is analogous to God's freedom but it is, of necessity, creaturely rather than uncreated. The same applies to what humanity has as life.

I have previously written that human beings can never have any of God's infinities because they are uncreated and we are created. Yet God can give an analogue of the infinity to a creature and it can perform analogously to the infinity. Here I am using language which is wholly inadequate to the task.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mark Quayle
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
What I intended is, "God alone has truly free will along with those to whom he chooses to give it". It is rather like the proposition, "God alone has true life along with those to whom he chooses to give it". I want to note once more that what humanity has as free will is analogous to God's freedom but it is, of necessity, creaturely rather than uncreated. The same applies to what humanity has as life.
Then their freedom is not truly free in the same sense that his is truly free. Not only does that mean the obvious, that they can not do everything that he can do, but that their choice is not completely independent of his causation. This to me obviously does not mean that he makes their choices for them, but that he has decreed (caused, and said so) that they will choose what they do. Hierarchy. It is not forced, anymore than it is forced that they go to Heaven, but it is definite and sure, that they will choose according to, and even caused by, ESTABLISHED by, his causation, and so we know it is by his decree.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Then their freedom is not truly free in the same sense that his is truly free.
I'd disagree with your conclusion. Why? Because God can do what we cannot do and we may not understand what or how he does it. But you, meaning a person who has the perspective that you express, want to know how it is done at some level, while I (meaning a Catholic with a perspective like that which I have expressed) am content with mystery where mystery exists.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Then their freedom is not truly free in the same sense that his is truly free. Not only does that mean the obvious, that they can not do everything that he can do, but that their choice is not completely independent of his causation. This to me obviously does not mean that he makes their choices for them, but that he has decreed (caused, and said so) that they will choose what they do. Hierarchy. It is not forced, anymore than it is forced that they go to Heaven, but it is definite and sure, that they will choose according to, and even caused by, ESTABLISHED by, his causation, and so we know it is by his decree.
The concept of free will is a central aspect of Catholic theology and philosophy. It is rooted in the belief in the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly good God who created human beings in his image and likeness (Gen 1:26). This means that human beings have been endowed with qualities and capacities that reflect God's own nature, including the ability to make choices and determine their own actions.

According to the Catholic Church, human freedom is a cornerstone of the human person and a participation in the divine freedom (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1731). In other words, human beings have been created with a share in the freedom of God, which allows them to choose to love and serve God of their own accord. This is in contrast to a deterministic or mechanical view of human life, which would deny the reality of human freedom.

The Catholic Church also teaches that God's own will is free in the sense that it is not determined by any outside force or power. He is not a mere product of circumstance or a prisoner of fate, but is the source of all existence and the sustainer of all things. He freely chooses to create and to sustain the world and all its creatures, and He freely chooses to redeem humanity through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (CCC, 1731).

The relationship between God's freedom and human freedom is complex and multifaceted, but it is essential to the Catholic understanding of the human person and the world. On the one hand, human beings are free in the sense that they can make choices and determine their own actions, but on the other hand, their freedom is limited by the consequences of their choices, the effects of original sin, and the grace of God.

The Catholic Church teaches that human freedom is not absolute, but is always subject to God's will and grace. This means that human beings are not the ultimate arbiters of their own fate, but are dependent on God for their very existence and salvation. The Church also recognises that human freedom is a precious and fragile thing, which can be corrupted by sin and evil, but which can also be transformed and redeemed by the grace of God.

In conclusion, the Catholic Church views the concept of free will as a central aspect of the human person, rooted in the belief in an all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly good God who created human beings in his image and likeness. Human freedom is seen as a participation in the divine freedom, allowing human beings to choose to love and serve God of their own accord, but always subject to God's will and grace.
 
Upvote 0

jameslouise

Active Member
Jan 16, 2023
185
16
62
WIRRAL
✟20,825.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Exactly. I would add, "and those to whom he chooses to give it".
And I believe that God chose to give it to his human creation.
Dont forget we are in the ' image of God after their Likeness'- we have to have free will.
 
Upvote 0

jameslouise

Active Member
Jan 16, 2023
185
16
62
WIRRAL
✟20,825.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pervasive. Meaning there is no escaping the fact and influence of it. All things except first cause, are caused. God spoke all fact into being.

That doesn't mean that you have no will and don't decide or choose. You certainly do. But your choices are not made in a vacuum. When you do as you do, you, like all other sentient creatures, do precisely what God 'already' spoke into being, or if it sits nicer with you, what God already spoke into fact
Sounds like another name for a Jedi mind trick to me, in effect you are saying God's case is so strong that it cannot be resisted so we have no choice then after all. Because God spoke that 'choice' into being which you deduce by His use of predestinate in Romans 8:29. All this hinges on your definition of 'foreknew' and as I have repeatedly pointed out Acts 17:28 and 13 other passages (in message 100) have a clear and obvious meaning of man existing before our arrival on earth.
We choose but that choice is made already is different to we choose but God knows what that choice will be. Remember it also says' predestinate to be conformed' not predestinated conformed, there is a difference.
Acts 17:28 is one of those pieces of scripture I claim that orthodoxy has missed and it completely changes very much. you tried to define the meaning of it which I thank you fo,r at least you had a go. But i got two paragraphs of beating about the bush really with no explanation as to what it means- just that you 'use it'. It is obvious in meaning
No choice is made in vacuum btw.
Why doesnt God do that for everyone then as he wants all top be saved? 1 Tim 2:4.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jameslouise

Active Member
Jan 16, 2023
185
16
62
WIRRAL
✟20,825.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Please explain how it is not fair
A God who selectively decides who is saved and who is not is not fair by all human concepts of fairness and such a defined God will deter some people, myself included from pursuing Him that is not a God who loved the whole world Joh 3:16 or who wants everyone saved 1 Tim 2:4.
Your argument is based on a single verse selected from the entire Bible (Acts 17:29)? That's very shaky ground, to put it nicely.

Paul was not saying that all human beings actually are God's offspring. The context of that sentence was established in the preceding sentence. After having said that "in him we live and move and have our being," Paul pointed out that this kind of idea is even reflected in some of their own poets when they say things like, "For we too are his offspring" (referring to the Greek poet Aratus and his hexameter poem Phenomena). So, in 21st century vernacular, Paul was essentially saying, "Even your view, wherein we are God's offspring, suggests that we shouldn't think of God as an idol designed by craftsmen from gold or silver or stone." Paul was making a case for the universal recognition of a general relationship and accountability to the one true God for all humanity. He is very clear throughout his other epistles who the children of God are—and it's not "everybody."



No its not I provide 13 passages in message 100 that confirm this stance as does Acts 17:28 too so the whole of Acts 17 really. These are Paul's words. the preceding text is defining God so the 'Him' of Acts 17:28 can only be God in Paul's own words. In effect he is just saying even your own old 'poets' knew it too. the use of 'offspring' does, I believe, have very deep meaning about the origin of man's base spirit.
For in him- the whole previous text is about God so this 'Him' must be too
we live-we have an existence, a life
and move, we move around
and have our being-we are a being, an existing creature no just a forethought;
as certain also of your own poets have said, a time frame is set and it is before Christ's arrival on earth, ruling out this referring to 'one body' in Christ or other in-dwelling 'relationships'
For we are also his offspring- this all because we are his offspring

Of course once this is established Calvinism dies because God' foreknew' everybody

No, it does not. It says that God wants "all people" to be saved. What does Paul mean by "all people" here? He explains that in the first two verses. Again, Paul was basically telling Timothy, "Prayers are to be offered on behalf of all people, by which I mean don't forget about kings and other people in authority. They are part of ‘all people’. God wants all people to be saved, Timothy—as hard as it is to believe, that includes people in the ruling class."

If you are still confused, then I suspect it's because you are letting preconceived ideas color your reading of this passage. When allowed to speak on its own, it is very concise and clear
Ah now I get where you are coming from , I was confused by you logic which i think is flawed,
1.I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
2.For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
3.For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

4.Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth
firstly,the text uses 'all men' and anyway I think 'everyone'. 'all men' and 'all people' are synonymous in the English anyway. You seem to be reasoning that because God uses the term 'all men' AND then defined even 'Kings and all that are in authority'(K&A) that this then renders 'all men' as a kind of 'adjective' for 'people who it is hard to believe God would call'.
I feel strongly that it does not mean this.
'All men' means all men. The K&A are just a subset of all men, God emphasizing it is all men even these K&A. The next verse is not referring to all men as an 'adjective' of 'men you would not think would be saved' but is back with 'all men'.
So God wants all men to be saved so why did He not predestinate all men to be saved then? Or did He predstinate all men to have a chance of ' being conformed in the image of Christ '. 'Predestinate to be conformed' not 'predestinated conformed' , there is a difference.

The text does not seem to allow either "coincident with" or "just after," for Jesus said that these given ones "will" come (not "are" coming, nor "did" come). And is there any meaningful difference between the Father giving them to the Son just before versus long before? If so, please explain it
I like this answer a lot It did give me much food for thought, i has asked Dialectic when God gave mankind to Jesus, I suggested it was at the time of salvation- or just after and I believe Calvinism says it is at the time of predestination.
I stand by my suggestion,
Joh 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out
i suggest the clue to what this means and when it happens is 'I will no wise cast out'. I suggest, this must be talking about the mysterious 'body of Christ' If we can be cast out, it is not in us but in God. this is not the in-dwellings within us, we cannot be cast out of ourselves. so my timeline hypothesis holds-God gives us to Jesus after His Holy Spirit has worked on us and handles all of our indwelling salvation 'moment', we then 'after that' we come to Jesus Himself-the body of Christ.

My apologies but I simply couldn't decipher what you were asking there. Could you repeat your question in a different way, please?

-- DialecticSkeptic
Oops! I put an extra 'will'in it; Here it is again corrected , you suggest that it is my 'regenerated will' that leads me to make a decision for Christ, do you have any scripture that backs up this claim i.e before salvation my will is regenerated?
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
I'd disagree with your conclusion. Why? Because God can do what we cannot do and we may not understand what or how he does it. But you, meaning a person who has the perspective that you express, want to know how it is done at some level, while I (meaning a Catholic with a perspective like that which I have expressed) am content with mystery where mystery exists.
To me, that is a disagreement of how one should end their thinking on the matter, or the end of what can be known about it so far. I'm not sure if that is what you are saying, but that is what it sounds like to me.

My conclusion concerns the technical view, of intellect. Mine says there are always better ways to put the matter, and always more to learn, always a delight to ponder and wonder. No final conclusion. Proverbs 25:2 "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings."

Yours, of the heart's response. Yours says, oh well, let's leave it here; what's too deep for me is better to convert from intellect to worship, along the lines of Psalms 131:1-2 "My heart is not proud, LORD, my eyes are not haughty; I do not concern myself with great matters or things too wonderful for me. But I have calmed and quieted myself, I am like a weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child I am content."
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
The concept of free will is a central aspect of Catholic theology and philosophy. It is rooted in the belief in the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly good God who created human beings in his image and likeness (Gen 1:26). This means that human beings have been endowed with qualities and capacities that reflect God's own nature, including the ability to make choices and determine their own actions.
I assume that God is self-aware, but I'm not sure he is introspective, in the sense that we are. I would think that his introspection would concern his attributes, and that, not singly; but we think how we can improve, what we do wrong and right, how we fit in, how we feel now, etc. The ways in which we reflect God's nature, to me, have more to do with the soul's capacity to be one with Christ.

An uncle I used to enjoy talking with, thought that our "made in his likeness" had to do with sentience and intellect. I thought to myself, "The angels, (who are not made in his likeness —at least, not in the same way we are), would laugh at hearing that!" I can't conceive of our freedom of thought in terms of independence from cause, like his freedom of thought.

Certainly we 'determine our own actions', but that logically cannot be independent of causation. We are creatures, not creators. It may seem independent, after all the mind's mechanizations. "The flowchart is huge and complicated!"

It occurs to me that we always think of ourselves on his level, or that our thinking considers him to be like us. Kind of makes me think of a child trying to be grown up.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Yours, of the heart's response. Yours says, oh well, let's leave it here; what's too deep for me is better to convert from intellect to worship, along the lines of Psalms 131:1-2 "My heart is not proud, LORD, my eyes are not haughty; I do not concern myself with great matters or things too wonderful for me. But I have calmed and quieted myself, I am like a weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child I am content."
One of my most loved psalms
 
  • Love
Reactions: Mark Quayle
Mark Quayle
Mark Quayle
I have, or had, quite a few JMT cds (and cassettes and LP's if I remember right). Probably been close to 15 years, maybe 20 since I heard any of them. Thanks for this.

Believe it or not, my brother-in-law, incorrigibly Reformed, Presbyterian (PCA), introduced us to JMT (or is that the other way around?). I wouldn't be surprised if JMT still tops his playlists.
Upvote 0
Xeno.of.athens
Xeno.of.athens
The old songs are the best. :)
Upvote 0
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
A little catechesis.

I. Freedom and Responsibility
1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one's own responsibility. By free will one shapes one's own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.
1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.
1733 The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes. There is no true freedom except in the service of what is good and just. the choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom and leads to "the slavery of sin."28
1734 Freedom makes man responsible for his acts to the extent that they are voluntary. Progress in virtue, knowledge of the good, and ascesis enhance the mastery of the will over its acts.
1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.
1736 Every act directly willed is imputable to its author:
Thus the Lord asked Eve after the sin in the garden: "What is this that you have done?"29 He asked Cain the same question.30 The prophet Nathan questioned David in the same way after he committed adultery with the wife of Uriah and had him murdered.31
An action can be indirectly voluntary when it results from negligence regarding something one should have known or done: for example, an accident arising from ignorance of traffic laws.
1737 An effect can be tolerated without being willed by its agent; for instance, a mother's exhaustion from tending her sick child. A bad effect is not imputable if it was not willed either as an end or as a means of an action, e.g., a death a person incurs in aiding someone in danger. For a bad effect to be imputable it must be foreseeable and the agent must have the possibility of avoiding it, as in the case of manslaughter caused by a drunken driver.
1738 Freedom is exercised in relationships between human beings. Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognized as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. the right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person. This right must be recognized and protected by civil authority within the limits of the common good and public order.32

28 Cf. Rom 6:17.
29 Gen 3:13.
30 Cf. Gen 4:10.
31 Cf. 2 Sam 12:7-15.
32 Cf. DH 2 # 7.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
An additional thought:
Sirach 15:14-22 God established man from the beginning, and he left him in the hand of his own counsel. 15 He added his commandments and precepts. 16 If you choose to keep the commandments, and if, having chosen them, you fulfill them with perpetual fidelity, they will preserve you. 17 He has set water and fire before you. Extend your hand to whichever one you would choose. 18 Before man is life and death, good and evil. Whichever one he chooses will be given to him. 19 For the wisdom of God is manifold. And he is strong in power, seeing all things without ceasing. 20 The eyes of the Lord are upon those who fear him, and he knows each one of the works of man. 21 He has commanded no one to act impiously, and he has given no one permission to sin. 22 For he does not desire a multitude of unfaithful and useless sons. (From the Vulgate in Latin)

Sirach, also called Ecclesiasticus was written in Hebrew.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Sounds like another name for a Jedi mind trick to me, in effect you are saying God's case is so strong that it cannot be resisted so we have no choice then after all. Because God spoke that 'choice' into being which you deduce by His use of predestinate in Romans 8:29. All this hinges on your definition of 'foreknew' and as I have repeatedly pointed out Acts 17:28 and 13 other passages (in message 100) have a clear and obvious meaning of man existing before our arrival on earth.
There is a huge difference between being forced to do something, and being induced to do something. If I am much stronger than you, and rip your hands loose from the door jamb and drag you out of your room, I am forcing you. But if I appeal to you—let's say, I change your mind— and you decide to leave your room, you are choosing.
We choose but that choice is made already is different to we choose but God knows what that choice will be. Remember it also says' predestinate to be conformed' not predestinated conformed, there is a difference.
That proves nothing. Doesn't even suggest where you are taking it.
Acts 17:28 is one of those pieces of scripture I claim that orthodoxy has missed and it completely changes very much. you tried to define the meaning of it which I thank you fo,r at least you had a go. But i got two paragraphs of beating about the bush really with no explanation as to what it means- just that you 'use it'. It is obvious in meaning
Just a note here: What is, to you, 'obvious', is not necessarily obvious. What IS obvious, which fact you seem to ignore, is that anyone's thinking pretty much follows a whole long chain of assumptions. Human assumptions. Unreliable assumptions. Assumptions full of human frailty and ignorance, not to mention arrogance, pride and all sorts of self-importance. You pile faulty thought upon faulty thought.

Isaiah 28:10 For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little. Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people, to whom he said, "This is the resting place, let the weary rest"; and, "This is the place of repose"-- but they would not listen. So then, the word of the LORD to them will become: Precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little.-- so that as they go they will fall backward; they will be injured and snared and captured.
No choice is made in vacuum btw.
It is a figure of speech. God's ability to choose doesn't resemble ours. He is the only independent will.
Why doesnt God do that for everyone then as he wants all top be saved? 1 Tim 2:4.
We've already been through 1 Timothy 2:4. Your logic depending on your use of it, is useless to convince me of anything.

To me it is monstrous that anyone would think, not only that God 'wanting' is like our wanting, but that anyone can frustrate his choice.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
5,087
1,352
Perth
✟124,015.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I assume that God is self-aware, but I'm not sure he is introspective, in the sense that we are. I would think that his introspection would concern his attributes, and that, not singly; but we think how we can improve, what we do wrong and right, how we fit in, how we feel now, etc. The ways in which we reflect God's nature, to me, have more to do with the soul's capacity to be one with Christ.

An uncle I used to enjoy talking with, thought that our "made in his likeness" had to do with sentience and intellect. I thought to myself, "The angels, (who are not made in his likeness —at least, not in the same way we are), would laugh at hearing that!" I can't conceive of our freedom of thought in terms of independence from cause, like his freedom of thought.

Certainly we 'determine our own actions', but that logically cannot be independent of causation. We are creatures, not creators. It may seem independent, after all the mind's mechanizations. "The flowchart is huge and complicated!"

It occurs to me that we always think of ourselves on his level, or that our thinking considers him to be like us. Kind of makes me think of a child trying to be grown up.
Is Jesus free in his human nature?
 
Upvote 0

jameslouise

Active Member
Jan 16, 2023
185
16
62
WIRRAL
✟20,825.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There is a huge difference between being forced to do something, and being induced to do something. If I am much stronger than you, and rip your hands loose from the door jamb and drag you out of your room, I am forcing you. But if I appeal to you—let's say, I change your mind— and you decide to leave your room, you are choosing.

That proves nothing. Doesn't even suggest where you are taking it.

Just a note here: What is, to you, 'obvious', is not necessarily obvious. What IS obvious, which fact you seem to ignore, is that anyone's thinking pretty much follows a whole long chain of assumptions. Human assumptions. Unreliable assumptions. Assumptions full of human frailty and ignorance, not to mention arrogance, pride and all sorts of self-importance. You pile faulty thought upon faulty thought.

Isaiah 28:10 For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little. Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people, to whom he said, "This is the resting place, let the weary rest"; and, "This is the place of repose"-- but they would not listen. So then, the word of the LORD to them will become: Precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little.-- so that as they go they will fall backward; they will be injured and snared and captured.

It is a figure of speech. God's ability to choose doesn't resemble ours. He is the only independent will.

We've already been through 1 Timothy 2:4. Your logic depending on your use of it, is useless to convince me of anything.

To me it is monstrous that anyone would think, not only that God 'wanting' is like our wanting, but that anyone can frustrate his choice.
 
Mark Quayle
Mark Quayle
JL are your words within the body of the quote there? If so, I can't make out your words from mine, except by careful reading. And I'm not going to bother to do that. I've got 11 more interesting posts to answer, and simpler to figure out who is saying what, not to mention more pressing obligations unrelated to the site.
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one's own responsibility. By free will one shapes one's own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.
I can agree with these words. The words, that is. Not so much the application to which they are applied —that is, the meaning or use imposed on them. They are opinion, and organization of thought —not truth upon which to base doctrine. And, of course, not that I would have chosen those words to say what I mean, haha. But what I'm wondering is, why go where these words go? Is this to find a definition for 'Free will' to explain the notion of 'free will' in its scriptural uses?

By the way, what is this document, you referred to as "A little catechesis" I. Freedom and Responsibility? Who wrote it? What position does it hold in Catholic writings? Just some Catholic's thoughts? How important is it?

1733 The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes. There is no true freedom except in the service of what is good and just. the choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom and leads to "the slavery of sin."28 1734 Freedom makes man responsible for his acts to the extent that they are voluntary. Progress in virtue, knowledge of the good, and ascesis enhance the mastery of the will over its acts.1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.1736 Every act directly willed is imputable to its author:Thus the Lord asked Eve after the sin in the garden: "What is this that you have done?"29 He asked Cain the same question.30 The prophet Nathan questioned David in the same way after he committed adultery with the wife of Uriah and had him murdered.31
Same as above, though not so much agreement, particularly 1734 and 1735; not sure what is intended by the first part of 1736: "Every act directly willed is imputable to its author". I'm wondering, why this narrative? Sounds like migrating more from doctrine into personal philosophy or moral lesson teaching or something. It isn't Bible.
An action can be indirectly voluntary when it results from negligence regarding something one should have known or done: for example, an accident arising from ignorance of traffic laws.1737 An effect can be tolerated without being willed by its agent; for instance, a mother's exhaustion from tending her sick child. A bad effect is not imputable if it was not willed either as an end or as a means of an action, e.g., a death a person incurs in aiding someone in danger. For a bad effect to be imputable it must be foreseeable and the agent must have the possibility of avoiding it, as in the case of manslaughter caused by a drunken driver.1738 Freedom is exercised in relationships between human beings. Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognized as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. the right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person. This right must be recognized and protected by civil authority within the limits of the common good and public order.32

28 Cf. Rom 6:17.
29 Gen 3:13.
30 Cf. Gen 4:10.
31 Cf. 2 Sam 12:7-15.
32 Cf. DH 2 # 7.
As you probably can imagine, I find a lot to differ with here. If you wish, we can argue concerning these things with which I disagree, but I'd like to know first, what is this about, or why did you post it? Are these your thoughts? Is this your thinking?
An additional thought:
Sirach 15:14-20 When God, in the beginning, created man, he made him subject to his own free choice. 15 If you choose you can keep the commandments; it is loyalty to do his will. 16 There are set before you fire and water; to whichever you choose, stretch forth your hand. 17 Before man are life and death, whichever he chooses shall be given him. 18 Immense is the wisdom of the LORD; he is mighty in power, and all-seeing. 19 The eyes of God see all he has made; he understands man's every deed. 20 No man does he command to sin, to none does he give strength for lies.
I suppose you know I don't attribute authority to Sirach as canon nor as by 'plenary verbal inspiration". It is not God's Word. It is man's thinking. I don't know this, because you didn't say, but I expect you added this bit because it to a large degree represents your thinking.
 
Upvote 0