Someone requested this quote , hope you read it ..

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟79,726.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Chapter 7.--Augustin Confesses that He Had Formerly Been in Error Concerning the Grace of God.



It was not thus that that pious and humble teacher thought--I speak of the most blessed Cyprian--when he said "that we must boast in nothing, since nothing is our own." [Cyprian, Testimonies to Quirinus, Book iii. ch. 4]

And in order to show this, he appealed to the apostle as a witness, where he said, "For what hast thou that thou hast not received? And if thou hast received it, why boastest thou as if thou hadst not received it?" [1 Cor. iv. 7]
And it was chiefly by this testimony that I myself also was convinced when I was in a similar error, thinking that faith whereby we believe on God is not God's gift, but that it is in us from ourselves, and that by it we obtain the gifts of God, whereby we may live temperately and righteously and piously in this world. For I did not think that faith was preceded by God's grace, so that by its means would be given to us what we might profitably ask, except that we could not believe if the proclamation of the truth did not precede; but that we should consent when the gospel was preached to us I thought was our own doing, and came to us from ourselves.

And this my error is sufficiently indicated in some small works of mine written before my episcopate. Among these is that which you have mentioned in your letters [Hilary's Letter, No. 226 in the collection of Augustin's Letters] wherein is an exposition of certain propositions from the Epistle to the Romans. Eventually, when I was retracting all my small works, and was committing that retractation to writing, of which task I had already completed two books before I had taken up your more lengthy letters,--when in the first volume I had reached the retractation of this book, I then spoke thus:--"Also discussing, I say, `what God could have chosen in him who was as yet unborn, whom He said that the elder should serve; and what in the same elder, equally as yet unborn, He could have rejected; concerning whom, on this account, the prophetic testimony is recorded, although declared long subsequently, "Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated,"' [Mal. i. 2, 3. Cf. Rom. ix. 13] I carried out my reasoning to the point of saying: `God did not therefore choose the works of any one in foreknowledge of what He Himself would give them, but he chose the faith, in the foreknowledge that He would choose that very person whom He foreknew would believe on Him,--to whom He would give the Holy Spirit, so that by doing good works he might obtain eternal life also.' I had not yet very carefully sought, nor had I as yet found, what is the nature of the election of grace, of which the apostle says, `A remnant are saved according to the election of grace.' [Rom. xi. 5] Which assuredly is not grace if any merits precede it; lest what is now given, not according to grace, but according to debt, be rather paid to merits than freely given. And what I next subjoined: `For the same apostle says, "The same God which worketh all in all;" [1 Cor. xii. 6] but it was never said, God believeth all in all;' and then added, `Therefore what we believe is our own, but what good thing we do is of Him who giveth the Holy Spirit to them that believe:'

I certainly could not have said, had I already known that faith itself also is found among those gifts of God which are given by the same Spirit. Both, therefore, are ours on account of the choice of the will, and yet both are given by the spirit of faith and love. For faith is not alone but as it is written, `Love with faith, from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ.' [Eph. vi. 23] And what I said a little after, `For it is ours to believe and to will, but it is His to give to those who believe and will, the power of doing good works through the Holy Spirit, by whom love is shed abroad in our hearts,'--is true indeed; but by the same rule both are also God's, because God prepares the will; and both are ours too, because they are only brought about with our good wills. And thus what I subsequently said also: `Because we are not able to will unless we are called; and when, after our calling, we would will, our willing is not sufficiently nor our running, unless God gives strength to us that run, and leads us whither He calls us;' and thereupon added: `It is plain, therefore, that it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy, that we do good works'--this is absolutely most true.

But I discovered little concerning the calling itself, which is according to God's purpose; for not such is the calling of all that are called, but only of the elect. Therefore what I said a little afterwards: `For as in those whom God elects it is not works but faith that begins the merit so as to do good works by the gift of God, so in those whom He condemns, unbelief and impiety begin the merit of punishment, so that even by way of punishment itself they do evil works'--I spoke most truly. But that even the merit itself of faith was God's gift, I neither thought of inquiring into, nor did I say. And in another place I say: `For whom He has mercy upon, He makes to do good works, and whom He hardeneth He leaves to do evil works; but that mercy is bestowed upon the preceding merit of faith, and that hardening is applied to preceding iniquity.' And this indeed is true; but it should further have been asked, whether even the merit of faith does not come from God's mercy,--that is, whether that mercy is manifested in man only because he is a believer, or whether it is also manifested that he may be a believer? For we read in the apostle's words: `I obtained mercy to be a believer.' [1 Cor. vii. 25] He does not say, `Because I was a believer.' Therefore although it is given to the believer, yet it has been given also that he may be a believer.

Therefore also, in another place in the same book I most truly said: `Because, if it is of God's mercy, and not of works, that we are even called that we may believe and it is granted to us who believe to do good works, that mercy must not be grudged to the heathen;'--although I there discoursed less carefully about that calling which is given according to God's purpose." [Retractations, Book i. ch. 23, Nos. 3, 4]
 

Ignatius21

Can somebody please pass the incense?
May 21, 2009
2,237
321
Dayton, OH
✟22,008.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for this - hopefully some of EO regulars will take note.

Noted. But, since we already knew that Augustine held to absolute divine predestination...what is it you'd like us to take note of, exactly?
 
Upvote 0

sdowney717

Newbie
Apr 20, 2013
8,712
2,022
✟102,598.00
Faith
Christian
Noted. But, since we already knew that Augustine held to absolute divine predestination...what is it you'd like us to take note of, exactly?

How about that faith is a spiritual gift of God.
And God has given to each a measure of faith.

Serve God with Spiritual Gifts
Romans 12
3 For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith.
 
Upvote 0

Ignatius21

Can somebody please pass the incense?
May 21, 2009
2,237
321
Dayton, OH
✟22,008.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
How about that faith is a spiritual gift of God.
And God has given to each a measure of faith.

Serve God with Spiritual Gifts
Romans 12

Of course faith is a spiritual gift of God. What's new to Orthodoxy about that? It's explicit in Scripture and the very earliest Fathers.

Anything else you'd like me to notice?
 
Upvote 0

sdowney717

Newbie
Apr 20, 2013
8,712
2,022
✟102,598.00
Faith
Christian
Of course faith is a spiritual gift of God. What's new to Orthodoxy about that? It's explicit in Scripture and the very earliest Fathers.

Anything else you'd like me to notice?

Acknowledging that truth has consequences regarding election.

A remnant are saved according to the election of grace.' [Rom. xi. 5] Which assuredly is not grace if any merits precede it; lest what is now given, not according to grace, but according to debt, be rather paid to merits than freely given

Which is a rehash of Romans 11

“I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace.[c] But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

7 What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded. 8 Just as it is written:

“God has given them a spirit of stupor,
Eyes that they should not see
And ears that they should not hear,
To this very day.”[d]


Who determines who is elect, meaning chosen of God to be saved?
You, a faith origination with you? Or a faith to believe it's origination come as a gift from God?

The rest being actively blinded?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AndOne
Upvote 0

Ignatius21

Can somebody please pass the incense?
May 21, 2009
2,237
321
Dayton, OH
✟22,008.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Acknowledging that truth has consequences regarding election.

Truth has consequences regarding everything. I'm afraid I don't understand your statement here.

Which is a rehash of Romans 11

Yes. And nobody is arguing that election is on the basis of merits, or that anyone earns anything from God. Romans 11 is also entirely in the context of Jews, Gentiles, and works of the law. Within Israel, those who were elect were those who obeyed in faith. Conversely, those who obeyed in faith, were elect. Both are true. Nobody denies that God elects. We also do not deny that man is responsible to obey God's call.

Jesus Christ himself was predestined. Did his human will have to be foreordained to submit to the divine? Was it subject to the divine? Or did it cooperate freely? (Hint...the latter option is the outworking of Chalcedonian Christology). Any attempt to understand the relationship between God's will and man's will, apart from the understanding of how human/divine wills cooperate in Christ, is misguided.

Who determines who is elect, meaning chosen of God to be saved?

God does.

You, a faith origination with you? Or a faith to believe it's origination come as a gift from God?

Faith cannot "originate" with me, because only God is unoriginate. God's faithfulness is uncreated, "pre-eternal," and therefore necessarily precedes our own responses in faith. And our faith in Christ, exercised freely, is not something we create in ourselves. Rather it is a reflection of God's own faithfulness toward us. So you're creating a dichotomy that does not exist. Both God and man can be free, without anyone impinging upon God's sovereignty.

So again, this quote from Augustine establishes that Augustine interpreted Paul this way. His interpretation was an outgrowth of his philosophical understanding of God's essence as absolute simplicity. He didn't just read Romans and say "eureka! That's so obvious!"
 
Upvote 0

Tzaousios

Αυγουστινιανικός Χριστιανός
Dec 4, 2008
8,504
609
Comitatus in praesenti
Visit site
✟26,729.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Noted. But, since we already knew that Augustine held to absolute divine predestination...what is it you'd like us to take note of, exactly?

I was wondering the same thing since I am often included in the "EO members" category as of late. :D
 
Upvote 0

cygnusx1

Jacob the twister.....
Apr 12, 2004
56,208
3,104
UK Northampton
Visit site
✟79,726.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Augustine ...............


Enchiridion
On Faith, Hope, and Love
Saint Augustine



CHAPTER XXV. Predestination and the Justice of God

98. Furthermore, who would be so impiously foolish as to say that God cannot turn the evil wills of men--as he willeth, when he willeth, and where he willeth--toward the good? But, when he acteth, he acteth through mercy; when he doth not act, it is through justice. For, "he hath mercy on whom he willeth; and whom he willeth, he hardeneth."205


Now when the apostle said this, he was commending grace, of which he had just spoken in connection with the twin children in Rebecca's womb: "Before they had yet been born, or had done anything good or bad, in order that the electing purpose of God might continue--not through works but through the divine calling--it was said of them, 'The elder shall serve the younger.' "206 Accordingly, he refers to another prophetic witness, where it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau have I hated."207 Then, realizing how what he said could disturb those whose understanding could not penetrate to this depth of grace, he adds: "What therefore shall we say to this? Is there unrighteousness in God? God forbid!"208 Yet it does seem unfair that, without any merit derived from good works or bad, God should love the one and hate the other. Now, if the apostle had wished us to understand that there were future good deeds of the one, and evil deeds of the other--which God, of course, foreknew--he would never have said "not of good works" but rather "of future works." Thus he would have solved the difficulty; or, rather, he would have left no difficulty to be solved. As it is, however, when he went on to exclaim, "God forbid!"--that is, "God forbid that there should be unfairness in God"--he proceeds immediately to add (to prove that no unfairness in God is involved here), "For he says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will show pity to whom I will show pity.'"209 Now, who but a fool would think God unfair either when he imposes penal judgment on the deserving or when he shows mercy to the undeserving? Finally, the apostle concludes and says, "Therefore, it is not a question of him who wills nor of him who runs but of God's showing mercy."210

Thus, both the twins were "by nature children of wrath,"211 not because of any works of their own, but because they were both bound in the fetters of damnation originally forged by Adam. But He who said, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy," loved Jacob in unmerited mercy, yet hated Esau with merited justice. Since this judgment of wrath was due them both, the former learned from what happened to the other that the fact that he had not, with equal merit, incurred the same penalty gave him no ground to boast of his own distinctive merits--but, instead, that he should glory in the abundance of divine grace, because "it is not a question of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God's showing mercy."212 And, indeed, the whole visage of Scripture and, if I may speak so, the lineaments of its countenance, are found to exhibit a mystery, most profound and salutary, to admonish all who carefully look thereupon "that he who glories, should glory in the Lord."213

99. Now, after the apostle had commended God's mercy in saying, "So then, there is no question of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God's showing mercy," next in order he intends to speak also of his judgment--for where his mercy is not shown, it is not unfairness but justice. For with God there is no injustice. Thus, he immediately added, "For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this very purpose I raised you up, that I may show through you my power, and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth."214 Then, having said this, he draws a conclusion that looks both ways, that is, toward mercy and toward judgment: "Therefore," he says, "he hath mercy on whom he willeth, and whom he willeth he hardeneth." He showeth mercy out of his great goodness; he hardeneth out of no unfairness at all. In this way, neither does he who is saved have a basis for glorying in any merit of his own; nor does the man who is damned have a basis for complaining of anything except what he has fully merited. For grace alone separates the redeemed from the lost, all having been mingled together in the one mass of perdition, arising from a common cause which leads back to their common origin. But if any man hears this in such a way as to say: "Why then does he find fault? For who resists his will?"215 --as if to make it seem that man should not therefore be blamed for being evil because God "hath mercy on whom he willeth and whom he willeth he hardeneth"--God forbid that we should be ashamed to give the same reply as we see the apostle giving: "O man, who are you to reply to God? Does the molded object say to the molder, 'Why have you made me like this?' Or is not the potter master of his clay, to make from the same mass one vessel for honorable, another for ignoble, use?"216

There are some stupid men who think that in this part of the argument the apostle had no answer to give; and, for lack of a reasonable rejoinder, simply rebuked the audacity of his gainsayer. But what he said--"O man, who are you?"--has actually great weight and in an argument like this recalls man, in a single word, to consider the limits of his capacity and, at the same time, supplies an important explanation.

For if one does not understand these matters, who is he to talk back to God? And if one does understand, he finds no better ground even then for talking back. For if he understands, he sees that the whole human race was condemned in its apostate head by a divine judgment so just that not even if a single member of the race were ever saved from it, no one could rail against God's justice. And he also sees that those who are saved had to be saved on such terms that it would show--by contrast with the greater number of those not saved but simply abandoned to their wholly just damnation--what the whole mass deserved and to what end God's merited judgment would have brought them, had not his undeserved mercy interposed. Thus every mouth of those disposed to glory in their own merits should be stopped, so that "he that glories may glory in the Lord."217
 
Upvote 0