Two questions for Calvinists if you please

7,580 Views | 174 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by dog
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Do you think man has any choice in his Salvation?

Can some one who is in the "elect" not believe Calvinism?

Thanks
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
The Debt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Its always important to define terms.

Can you help define "choice"? Is it "free moral agency"?

I feel like sometimes you are speaking Queens English and I am speaking American...we are both speaking English with different backgrounds and limited shared definitions.


dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Debt said:

Its always important to define terms.

Can you help define "choice"? Is it "free moral agency"?

I feel like sometimes you are speaking Queens English and I am speaking American...we are both speaking English with different backgrounds and limited shared definitions.





Okay let's try this. Do you think some men are damned without ever having a chance to choose Salvation?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Mrs. Lovelight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

Do you think man has any choice in his Salvation?

Can some one who is in the "elect" not believe Calvinism?

Thanks
Yes, man HAD a choice,it choice was made by our federal head Adam (Rom. 5:12-14). At this time all are born in and under the curse of sin. The state of fallen man (we all are born in this condition) is one of enmity toward God. We cannot choose him, He must act.

(Just as an aside, I think too much emphasis is put on election, I believe it's scriptural but it's not what the world needs to hear, they need to hear of someone (Jesus) doing everything God requires of mankind. Jesus was the 2nd Adam who kept the Covenant of Works perfectly and fulfilled all righteousness (fulfilled the Law) on our behalf.

Absolutely!

You're welcome.
The Debt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
(Short answer, yes).

What Romans 1? Paul makes the case that God is evident to every man. You basically have to be blind to miss Him.

But that's exactly how the unregenerate are. Out of the billions of lost people in the world, why don't they just magically choose to follow God? They have the opportunity, they have free will (if you believe), why aren't they waking up one day and saying "Gee God I'm gonna stop running and follow you"?

If they have free choice, you should be able to point to individuals or groups who independently came to Christ.

This is the story the Arminians tell each other. "The Holy Spirit approaches all mankind evenly, God loves evenly...etc etc."

But no. Mankind is dead in their transgressions, they cannot make choices.

When Christ called Lazarus out of the tomb, did Lazarus have a choice? "No Jesus, I rather not."

I don't understand how anyone can expect what is spiritually dead to even be in a position to understand a spiritual concept. Oh but the arminian, without any of those independent converts in "Africa", are left to say well God needs a salesteam to stand over a corpse and tell it why it needs Jesus and hope it decides correctly.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Debt said:

(Short answer, yes).

What Romans 1? Paul makes the case that God is evident to every man. You basically have to be blind to miss Him.

But that's exactly how the unregenerate are. Out of the billions of lost people in the world, why don't they just magically choose to follow God? They have the opportunity, they have free will (if you believe), why aren't they waking up one day and saying "Gee God I'm gonna stop running and follow you"?

If they have free choice, you should be able to point to individuals or groups who independently came to Christ.

This is the story the Arminians tell each other. "The Holy Spirit approaches all mankind evenly, God loves evenly...etc etc."

But no. Mankind is dead in their transgressions, they cannot make choices.

When Christ called Lazarus out of the tomb, did Lazarus have a choice? "No Jesus, I rather not."

I don't understand how anyone can expect what is spiritually dead to even be in a position to understand a spiritual concept. Oh but the arminian, without any of those independent converts in "Africa", are left to say well God needs a salesteam to stand over a corpse and tell it why it needs Jesus and hope it decides correctly.
How do you know for a fact that they have not been pursued by God and some have accepted Christ without even knowing the name of what they are accepting? And how do you know none of them are among the "elect" that God has chosen?

And can one be "elect"and not a Calvinist?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
The Debt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

Can some one who is in the "elect" not believe Calvinism?

Absolutely. I didn't believe in Calvinism for 20 years of salvation. In fact I warred against it, and lost a few friends in the process.

Ultimately what got me to see the light, was massive conviction of sin. As a free will Baptist, I believed there was good in every man. We all bear the image of God, no? There has to be good in the unsaved, somewhere. Its just not right for man to be condemned. At the root of it, I didn't trust God. I didn't trust He could execute all of this and be unsullied, He had to be culpable.

I got to a low point spiritually, and a brother showed me. Romans 3, Nebuchadnezzars confession in Daniel, God interjecting in Job. These passages put mankind in its place, spiritually and cosmicly.

I based my free will argument on man being on a higher footing than we really are. We have defeated diseases, split the atom, invented the KFC Double Down, we do well. But...we are a creature from the dirt. We do not walk in the depths of the seas, we did not command the mountains to be their height.

The Potter absolutely has power over the clay to make one man for the purpose of honor and the other for dishonor (or wrath).

All the silly times I equivocated God's saving plan "before the founding of the earth" as "God just knew ahead of time, He is just running out this simulation" it slapped me in the face. There is no way I could escape Him if I tried...and yes I tried.

I was submitted.


It's funny, I remember the weight I had when I was Arminian. I would deliver the Gospel in nursing homes, they don't have long to live, this may be the last time they get a chance. The burden weighed on me to get em saved. After my intellectual conversion, I could deliver the exact same message and I was light as a feather.

The previous theology made me responsible to properly evangelize "I gotta help the Holy Spirit along". But then I actually trusted Him: those that are called will hear it, those who are dead will not.

Ultimately God is responsible. He have mercy on whom He chooses to have mercy. To inject our will into that truth is the height of arrogance.

So yes, you don't have to be a Calvinist to be elect. The elect were elected before earth was created, they were elect in their sin, they were elect before they submitted (partially or fully) to Him.
The Debt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Show me a congregation that independently arrived at salvation through an unknown God.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Debt said:

dermdoc said:

Can some one who is in the "elect" not believe Calvinism?

Absolutely. I didn't believe in Calvinism for 20 years of salvation. In fact I warred against it, and lost a few friends in the process.

Ultimately what got me to see the light, was massive conviction of sin. As a free will Baptist, I believed there was good in every man. We all bear the image of God, no? There has to be good in the unsaved, somewhere. Its just not right for man to be condemned. At the root of it, I didn't trust God. I didn't trust He could execute all of this and be unsullied, He had to be culpable.

I got to a low point spiritually, and a brother showed me. Romans 3, Nebuchadnezzars confession in Daniel, God interjecting in Job. These passages put mankind in its place, spiritually and cosmicly.

I based my free will argument on man being on a higher footing than we really are. We have defeated diseases, split the atom, invented the KFC Double Down, we do well. But...we are a creature from the dirt. We do not walk in the depths of the seas, we did not command the mountains to be their height.

The Potter absolutely has power over the clay to make one man for the purpose of honor and the other for dishonor (or wrath).

All the silly times I equivocated God's saving plan "before the founding of the earth" as "God just knew ahead of time, He is just running out this simulation" it slapped me in the face. There is no way I could escape Him if I tried...and yes I tried.

I was submitted.


It's funny, I remember the weight I had when I was Arminian. I would deliver the Gospel in nursing homes, they don't have long to live, this may be the last time they get a chance. The burden weighed on me to get em saved. After my intellectual conversion, I could deliver the exact same message and I was light as a feather.

The previous theology made me responsible to properly evangelize "I gotta help the Holy Spirit along". But then I actually trusted Him: those that are called will hear it, those who are dead will not.

Ultimately God is responsible. He have mercy on whom He chooses to have mercy. To inject our will into that truth is the height of arrogance.

So yes, you don't have to be a Calvinist to be elect. The elect were elected before earth was created, they were elect in their sin, they were elect before they submitted (partially or fully) to Him.


I actually agree with much of your post. And glad you found peace with the Lord. Have a good night.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Debt said:

Show me a congregation that independently arrived at salvation through an unknown God.


What if they are of the elect? Chosen before time? And how do you know that congregation does not exist?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's futile to even attempt to understand how an omniscient (?) being who transcends time (?) interacts with or determines the fate of or offers free will to creatures bound by time. Is there cause and effect outside of time? Is there sequence? Is there "if then?"

What is man to question God?

Regardless, we all live as though there is such a thing as free will within the bounds of the laws of the universe. God at least gave us the appearance of choice, so appear to choose wisely.
The Debt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

The Debt said:

Show me a congregation that independently arrived at salvation through an unknown God.


What if they are of the elect? Chosen before time? And how do you know that congregation does not exist?

If they are elect then God's got em covered.

But derm, there are 6 billion non-Christians in the world. At least 1 in 10 choose right, right? 600 million people, twice the population of America, should come to Christ independently without the presence of a missionary. Or is the Holy Spirit ineffectual to achieve 1:10?

If God is approaching all of them with no partiality, the non western world should really have the same proportion of Christians as the west. Really it's not fair that there is a concentration of believers here.

At the end of the day, Armenians paint the Holy Spirit as impotent to convict 90-99% of the lost.

Do me a favor, I know you know these stories, but I want you to read and chew on something. Sodom and Ninevah, they were equal in their wickedness, it even uses mirrored language. We know that God saves one and condemns the other. The question I want you to chew on for at least a night: why did God give a message of repentance to one, but not the other?
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They turn billions of creatures created in Gods own image into nothing more than the arbitrary victims of God's cosmic casino games. Quite possibly the worst doctrine in all of world religion. It is so awful on its face that they have to pseudo-intellectualize themselves in knots to justify believing it to themselves.

It matters not whether election is not what people want to hear. Its what you believe, so own it.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Jesus wasn't special because He kept the "covenant of works" whatever that means.

Jesus was special because He was God. Even if any man was without sin, lived a completely sinless life, He still would need salvation through Jesus Christ.

This borders on the error of Pelagius.

Fulfilling the law wasn't a lottery or a game to be won.
Win At Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How do Calvinists interpret the "my son was dead, but now is alive" in the prodigal son's "decision " to return to his father? For this parable to match Calvinist theology, the father would have had to send out an army to bring the son back without the son's "decision ", not to mention his "actions " in order to be considered "alive" by the father. Does Jesus not understand proper Calvinist theology?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Debt said:

dermdoc said:

Can some one who is in the "elect" not believe Calvinism?

Absolutely. I didn't believe in Calvinism for 20 years of salvation. In fact I warred against it, and lost a few friends in the process.

Ultimately what got me to see the light, was massive conviction of sin. As a free will Baptist, I believed there was good in every man. We all bear the image of God, no? There has to be good in the unsaved, somewhere. Its just not right for man to be condemned. At the root of it, I didn't trust God. I didn't trust He could execute all of this and be unsullied, He had to be culpable.

I got to a low point spiritually, and a brother showed me. Romans 3, Nebuchadnezzars confession in Daniel, God interjecting in Job. These passages put mankind in its place, spiritually and cosmicly.

I based my free will argument on man being on a higher footing than we really are. We have defeated diseases, split the atom, invented the KFC Double Down, we do well. But...we are a creature from the dirt. We do not walk in the depths of the seas, we did not command the mountains to be their height.

The Potter absolutely has power over the clay to make one man for the purpose of honor and the other for dishonor (or wrath).

All the silly times I equivocated God's saving plan "before the founding of the earth" as "God just knew ahead of time, He is just running out this simulation" it slapped me in the face. There is no way I could escape Him if I tried...and yes I tried.

I was submitted.


It's funny, I remember the weight I had when I was Arminian. I would deliver the Gospel in nursing homes, they don't have long to live, this may be the last time they get a chance. The burden weighed on me to get em saved. After my intellectual conversion, I could deliver the exact same message and I was light as a feather.

The previous theology made me responsible to properly evangelize "I gotta help the Holy Spirit along". But then I actually trusted Him: those that are called will hear it, those who are dead will not.

Ultimately God is responsible. He have mercy on whom He chooses to have mercy. To inject our will into that truth is the height of arrogance.

So yes, you don't have to be a Calvinist to be elect. The elect were elected before earth was created, they were elect in their sin, they were elect before they submitted (partially or fully) to Him.
You presume that having faith in God to be a righteous judge of all mankind, in their free will, is somehow denying His sovereignty?

Your whole approach of "get 'em saved" is ridiculous.

Put man in his place?? NO. God didn't come to belittle man. He didn't make Adam to show Adam how inferior he was to God. God made Adam to divinize him. And when Adam fell, God did not let the work of His hands be destroyed but condescended to come as Man, as a servant, and die - yes, even death on a Cross - to save Adam. And Christ did save Adam, AND ALL MANKIND. Because from the heights of the difference between God and man He descended to us. As far as He descended to us, He pulls us up to Him. This is the promise of salvation.

St. Maximos explains it beautifully:

Quote:

For to this end did He make us that we should become partakers of the Divine nature [II St. Peter 1:4] and sharers of His Eternity; and that through deification, which proceeds from Grace, we might prove like unto Him. It is for the sake of deification that all existing things are constituted and abide, and all non-existing things are brought into being and come into being.
Quote:

A sure warrant for looking forward with hope to deification of human nature is provided by the incarnation of God, which makes man god to the same degree as God Himself became man.
Quote:

Let us become the image of the one whole God, bearing nothing earthly in ourselves, so that we may consort with God and become gods, receiving from God our existence as gods.

Quote:

For it is clear that He who became man without sin will divinize human nature without changing it into the divine nature, and will raise it up for His own sake to the same degree as He lowered Himself for man's sake.


I do not like your brand of Christianity.

The Debt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You think man CAN choose. This means man, ignorant of righteousness can choose righteousness.

So I guess Paul is a liar, and the Psalmist he is quoting in Romans 3:
Quote:

There is none righteous, not even one;
11 There is none who understands,
There is none who seeks for God;
12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless;
There is none who does good,
There is not even one."

Man doesn't choose God, he is incapable.

And yes, God does put man in its place. Go read Job 38. God sets Job straight, gird up your loins like a man, and you will answer me when I ask you.

In Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar, the emperor of the largest empire to date, is cast out of his courts to be humbled and finally finds favor with God when he confesses:

Quote:

"All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
But He does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth;
And no one can ward off His hand
Or say to Him, 'What have You done?'


There is another time in Isaiah 40, iirc, where the prophet declares all the nations of the earth don't amount to a speck of dust on the scale. (Nations are made of people, btw).
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Missing the point.

No one does good, not even one. Of course. But God is merciful.

As for me, I said, "O LORD, be gracious to me; Heal my soul, for I have sinned against You."

Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.


Quote:

I cried out to You, O LORD;
I said, "You are my refuge,
My portion in the land of the living.

"Give heed to my cry,
For I am brought very low;
Deliver me from my persecutors,
For they are too strong for me.

"Bring my soul out of prison,
So that I may give thanks to Your name;
The righteous will surround me,
For You will deal bountifully with me."


And of course,

Quote:

Out of the depths I have cried to You, O LORD.
Lord, hear my voice!
Let Your ears be attentive
To the voice of my supplications.

If You, LORD, should mark iniquities,
O Lord, who could stand?

But there is forgiveness with You,
That You may be feared.

I wait for the LORD, my soul does wait,
And in His word do I hope.

My soul waits for the Lord
More than the watchmen for the morning;
Indeed, more than the watchmen for the morning.

O Israel, hope in the LORD;
For with the LORD there is lovingkindness,
And with Him is abundant redemption.

And He will redeem Israel
From all his iniquities.
These are theological errors even an Orthodox child would not make, because our faith guards us against such sad wanderings. We read these psalms in liturgies, Psalm 130 in every Vespers service.

///

God put Job in his place, yes. "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."

What does that have to do with the Incarnation of Our Lord and Savior?

God is Great and Good and He is the Living God and there is none like Him, forever. He is the only source of life and existence, He is the Existing One.

AND He came to save all men because He is good and He is the lover of Mankind.

The Theophany of the OT and Christ's incarnation wasn't God's way of demonstrating how much higher His ways were than ours. He came for love to redeem what was lost. I quoted this on another thread, but --


Quote:

Be a herald of God's goodness, for God rules over you, unworthy though you are; for although your debt to Him is so great, yet He is not seen exacting payment from you, and from the small works you do, He bestows great rewards upon you. Do not call God just, for His justice is not manifest in the things concerning you. And if David calls Him just and upright, His Son revealed to us that He is good and kind. 'He is good,' He says, 'to the evil and to the impious' (cf. Luke 6:35). How can you call God just when you come across the Scriptural passage on the wage given to the workers? 'Friend, I do thee no wrong: I will give unto this last even as unto thee. Is thine eye evil because I am good?' (Matt. 20:12-15). How can a man call God just when he comes across the passage on the prodigal son who wasted his wealth with riotous living, how for the compunction alone which he showed, the father ran and fell upon his neck and gave him authority over all his wealth? (Luke 15:11 ff.). None other but His very Son said these things concerning Him, lest we doubt it; and thus He bare witness concerning Him. Where, then, is God's justice, for whilst we are sinners Christ died for us! (cf. Rom. 5:8). But if here He is merciful, we may believe that He will not change.
God is not bound to your understanding of Justice - and thank God for His Mercy for that!
chuckd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lots of Calvinist threads lately. What happened?
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marco Esquandolas said:

They turn billions of creatures created in Gods own image into nothing more than the arbitrary victims of God's cosmic casino games. Quite possibly the worst doctrine in all of world religion. It is so awful on its face that they have to pseudo-intellectualize themselves in knots to justify believing it to themselves.

It matters not whether election is not what people want to hear. Its what you believe, so own it.


It's amazing how cruel a game of Life you can convince people to believe in so long as they think they get to win.

It's interesting that they presume they are even elect. Perhaps they are just like the ones who perform miracles in Matthew and are told "I never knew you". Where are the miracle working Christians today who've achieved faith like a mustard seed they presume superiority to? They would then be the greatest losers in the game.

It's also peculiar that under the it's all up to god model their religion should be so geographic just like all the others. And I can't help but notice the language used to describe it is pretty cult like. It "cannot be understood" by those whom aren't chosen. A convenient way yo divorce yourself from human logic and rationality.

But I guess I only react this way because I'm an NPC in this game.
Cage_Stage
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

No one does good, not even one. Of course. But God is merciful.

As for me, I said, "O LORD, be gracious to me; Heal my soul, for I have sinned against You."
It's not just that we don't do good. It's so much more dire than that because we're unable to do any good apart from God. We are, by nature, dead in sin: children of wrath, walking according to the ways of the world, desiring nothing but the depraved and selfish lusts of our minds, under the influence of the great deceiver Satan himself.
Quote:

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
And the "But God" doesn't end with the divine attribute of merciful. God isn't just waiting around to exhibit mercy in reaction to your sinner's prayer. I'm not sure if that's what you meant to convey, but that's the impression I get from your post.

God does in the first instance what we couldn't do--or even contribute to--raising us from being dead in sin.
Quote:

4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

We have to be regenerated before we can even make a faithful, repentant sinner's prayer. We're His workmanship, prepared by Him (alone), so that we might walk according to His purposes.
Quote:

10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I never said God was waiting around. His mercy is for all men, and that's why his justice is merciful and his mercy is just.

Monergism is not orthodox and never has been. We are God's fellow workers.

None of this is an issue if you get rid of the binary sense of salvation, for what it's worth.
Cage_Stage
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
k2aggie07 said:

Monergism is not orthodox and never has been. We are God's fellow workers.
Monergism didn't exactly spring to life for the first time with Luther and Calvin. They themselves leaned on the teachings of Augustine, who pointed to Cyprian and Paul, maybe others.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102145.htm
Quote:

Such victory and emancipation cannot, without God's grace, be achieved by the human will, which is by no means to be called free so long as it is subject to prevailing and enslaving lusts; "For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage." And the Son of God has Himself said, "If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed."
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15121.htm
Quote:

Therefore I ought first to show that the faith by which we are Christians is the gift of God, if I can do that more thoroughly than I have already done in so many and so large volumes. But I see that I must now reply to those who say that the divine testimonies which I have adduced concerning this matter are of avail for this purpose, to assure us that we have faith itself of ourselves, but that its increase is of God; as if faith were not given to us by Him, but were only increased in us by Him, on the ground of the merit of its having begun from us.
Quote:

Or if God does not make men willing who were not willing, on what principle does the Church pray, according to the Lord's commandment, for her persecutors? For thus also the blessed Cyprian would have it to be understood that we say, Your will be done, as in heaven so in earth, that is, as in those who have already believed, and who are, as it were, heaven, so also in those who do not believe, and on this account are still the earth. What, then, do we pray for on behalf of those who are unwilling to believe, except that God would work in them to will also? Certainly the apostle says, Brethren, my heart's good will, indeed, and my prayer to God for them, is for their salvation. Romans 10:1 He prays for those who do not believe for what, except that they may believe? For in no other way do they obtain salvation. If, then, the faith of the petitioners precede the grace of God, does the faith of them on whose behalf prayer is made that they may believeprecede the grace of God? since this is the very thing that is besought for them, that on them that believe not that is, who have not faith faith itself may be bestowed? When, therefore, the gospel is preached, some believe, some believenot; but they who believe at the voice of the preacher from without, hear of the Father from within, and learn; while they who do not believe, hear outwardly, but inwardly do not hear nor learn that is to say, to the former it is given to believe; to the latter it is not given.
Quote:

Many hear the word of truth; but some believe, while others contradict. Therefore, the former will to believe; the latter do not will. Who does not know this? Who can deny this? But since in some the will is prepared by the Lord, in others it is not prepared, we must assuredly be able to distinguish what comes from God's mercy, and what from His judgment. What Israel sought for, says the apostle, he has not obtained, but the election has obtained it; and the rest were blinded, as it is written, God gave to them the spirit of compunction eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, even to this day. And David said, Let their table be made a snare, a retribution, and a stumblingblock to them; let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see; and bow down their back always. Romans 11:7

I'm not trying to provoke here; I'm genuinely curious. Why is Augustine exalted as a church father in the East, if the EOC rejects his teachings on original/representative sin, the fall of man's nature, and God being the only effective mover in freeing man from bondage to sin? Is it because he put down pelagianism, even if he fell off the horse in the other, equally wrong direction?
Quote:

None of this is an issue if you get rid of the binary sense of salvation, for what it's worth.
Can you explain this more? I think we agree that salvation is a process, and, therefore, not completely binary in the sense that a switch is flipped and it's over. You disagree that Paul teaches distinct stages--justification (a pronouncement of imputed righteousness upon faith), sanctification (faith working in love to be conformed to Christ), and finally glorification. (Romans 8:29-30.)

So it's a continuum with faith/works/perseverance leading to justification at the end of earthly life on one end and unbelief/wickedness leading to condemnation at the other end? How does that work itself out with respect to the final destinations of new heaven/earth on one hand and hell on the other? That's pretty binary.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We believe St Augustine to be enlightened, and St Photios calls him blessed. But that does not make him infallible, and many of his writings are not received well by the east. St Photios says his writings are distorted by others to their own purposes and we should have more humility and grace than to sinfully project an error onto him, or implicate him in the error.

I believe St Augustine was separated by language and philosophical inheritance from the east and struggled to safely express what he had experienced. It is this experience that makes him enlightened, not what he wrote. And it is clear he was enlightened, even if some of the philosophical particulars he expressed were not Iron-clad. This is why not all should philosophize unless people take their errors as truth (paraphrasing St Gregory). It is for this enlightenment that he is considered a saint. And yes, there was an error in Pelagius' teaching. Please note, however, that there is no such thing in the east as a heresy of semipelagianism. The history of this "heresy" is centuries later and wound up having westerners arrogantly condemning St John Cassian, a true east-west Saint, posthumously and centuries removed. We should immediately then give pause to embracing such an idea.

I think St. John Cassian's writings on this subject are a clear way forward.

The infallibility of the Church is not found in any particular Father but in unity of confession for the church as a whole. The fathers are infallible when they express theology from within the church, their infallibility begins and ends with that of the church. So we don't look to individual fathers but instead for consensus.

////

Yes your last paragraph is our belief. And yes eventual salvation is binary (kind of, in a sense), but this is not typically what folks on this side of death are speaking of.

Even St Paul speaks of justification in the future tense. In Romans he says the declaration of our righteousness (justified, dikaioo) will happen at the judgment ("it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous...this will take place on the day when God judges people's secrets through Jesus Christ..." Romans 2:13,16).

PS St Cyprian was a synergist as well:
"You are still in the world. You are still in the battlefield. You daily fight for your lives. So you must be careful, that what you have begun to be with such a blessed commencement will be consummated in you. It is a small thing to have first received something. It is a greater thing to be able to keep that which you have attained. Faith itself and the saving birth do not make alive by merely being received. Rather, they must be preserved. It is not the actual attainment, but the perfecting, that keeps a man for God. The Lord taught this in his instruction when he said, 'Look! You have been made whole. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you. Solomon, Saul, and many others were able to keep the grace given to them so long as they walked in the Lord's ways. However, when the discipline of the Lord was forsaken by them, grace also forsook them."
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chuckd said:

Lots of Calvinist threads lately. What happened?


Got bored with the Judaizing and pacifist heresies.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
pacifist heresies
“Conquer men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of justice to shame by your compassion."
--St Isaac the Syrian
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

pacifist heresies


Pacifism isn't heresy but saying Jesus' work is Satan's is. That thread hasn't disappeared.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
7thGenTexan said:

RetiredAg said:

pacifist heresies
Pacifism isn't heresy but saying Jesus' work is Satan's is. That thread hasn't disappeared.
I don't recall that thread. Link? Are you referring to my understanding of OT violence? But glad you at least draw back the "pacifist heresies" comment.
“Conquer men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of justice to shame by your compassion."
--St Isaac the Syrian
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here is a good article about St John.

https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxyandheterodoxy/2012/08/13/the-curious-case-of-st-john-cassian/

And another discussing his conference 13 specifically.
https://benedictseraphim.wordpress.com/2005/03/31/st-john-cassian-on-grace-and-free-will/

His position is thoroughly orthodox and semi-pelagianism is a kind of revisionist history to support the reformed movement. Ahistorical.
Cage_Stage
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
k2aggie07 said:

PS St Cyprian was a synergist as well:
"You are still in the world. You are still in the battlefield. You daily fight for your lives. So you must be careful, that what you have begun to be with such a blessed commencement will be consummated in you. It is a small thing to have first received something. It is a greater thing to be able to keep that which you have attained. Faith itself and the saving birth do not make alive by merely being received. Rather, they must be preserved. It is not the actual attainment, but the perfecting, that keeps a man for God. The Lord taught this in his instruction when he said, 'Look! You have been made whole. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you. Solomon, Saul, and many others were able to keep the grace given to them so long as they walked in the Lord's ways. However, when the discipline of the Lord was forsaken by them, grace also forsook them."
This quote is not inconsistent with a monergistic rebirth and synergistic sanctification. I know that I need the gospel daily in order to progress and persevere, contribute to the church's salt and light, and with the aid of the Spirit, do good works (with which final judgment will accord). But that doesn't indicate anything about who is responsible for the initial turning to faith. (John 3:7-8.)
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
A relevant excerpt of St John Cassian's writing in Conferences 13 (emphasis mine):

Quote:

And so these [i. e., free will and omnipotence or providence] are somehow mixed up and indiscriminately confused, so that among many persons, which depends on the other is involved in great questionings, i.e., does God have compassion upon us because we have shown the beginning of a good will, or does the beginning of a good will follow because God has had compassion upon us? For many believing each of these and asserting them more widely than is right are entangled in all kinds of opposite errors. For if we say that the beginning of free will is in our own power, what about Paul the persecutor, what about Matthew the publican, of whom the one was drawn to salvation while eager for bloodshed and the punishment of the innocent, the other for violence and rapine? But if we say that the beginning of our free will is always due to the inspiration of the grace of God, what about the faith of Zaccheus, or what are we to say of the goodness of the thief on the cross, who by their own desires brought violence to bear on the kingdom of heaven and so prevented the special leadings of their vocation? But if we attribute the performance of virtuous acts, and the execution of God's commands to our own will, how do we pray: "Strengthen, O God, what Thou hast wrought in us;" and "The work of our hands stablish Thou upon us?" . . . These two then; viz., the grace of God and free will seem opposed to each other, but really are in harmony, and we gather from the system of goodness that we ought to have both alike, lest if we withdraw one of them from man, we may seem to have broken the rule of the Church's faith: for when God sees us inclined to will what is good, He meets, guides, and strengthens us: for "At the voice of thy cry, as soon as He shall hear, He will answer thee;" and: "Call upon Me," He says, "in the day of tribulation and I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify Me." And again, if He finds that we are unwilling or have grown cold, He stirs our hearts with salutary exhortations, by which a good will is either renewed or formed in us. (Conferences, XIII.11)
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Blue star
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

7thGenTexan said:

RetiredAg said:

pacifist heresies
Pacifism isn't heresy but saying Jesus' work is Satan's is. That thread hasn't disappeared.
I don't recall that thread. Link? Are you referring to my understanding of OT violence? But glad you at least draw back the "pacifist heresies" comment.


Heresy from pacifists, not pacifism as heresy. More from Bryanisbest than you, though you too appear to reject much of the Old Testament as satanic and you avoided commenting on most of the New Testament passages.Did I really need to post this link?

https://texags.com/forums/15/topics/2918113/1#discussion
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

though you too appear to reject much of the Old Testament as satanic
Not true. I don't believe God commands genocide or infanticide, but that doesn't mean I believe much of the OT is "satanic". I just believe you have to use the lens of the cross to interpret it and dig past the ugly surface, sin-stained surface to see how it does testify to Christ. I certainly don't reject "much of the OT", much less as being "satanic". I believe God must look like Jesus because Jesus is the exact representation of God's nature and the radiance of His glory. I don't believe morality is relative and I don't believe God commands us to sin. I believe that God accommodates these violent and flawed depictions of Him as a way of maintaining a relationship with His creation, but through time, He reveals more and more of who He truly is until we get to Jesus who clears it all up for us as to God's nature. I do really hope that clears up any misconceptions about how I understand this. But please, do not think that I reject much of the OT as "satanic". That is simply not the case.

And I asked for the link because I post on many threads here and they run together.
“Conquer men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of justice to shame by your compassion."
--St Isaac the Syrian
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The other key point - and I didn't even realize this was a difference - is how we view human nature. Having studied st Maximos I sort of inherited the orthodox view as default. Human nature was not wholly marred by the fall. And properly human nature is fundamentally good. The article above clarifies:

Quote:

As has been implied from above, monergism and Augustinianism and Pelagianism, rest on an understanding of human nature such that human nature and divine nature relate in terms of opposition. Human nature resists divine nature. St. John, however, affirms that which had been dogmatized at Chalcedon and III Constantinople: that human and divine nature were not a relation of opposition, but, via the Incarnation, were in synergistic cooperation. That is to say, human nature is not naturally opposed to God's nature, nor, given that Jesus had enhominized the divine nature, could human will be said to be naturally in bondage. If there is a bondage to the will, it is not due to human nature, but due to the hypostasis of human nature, that is to say, the person. St. Maximus will later clarify and distinguish the natural will from the gnomic will. But we need not trace St. Maximus' teachings here. It is enough to follow St. John in affirming the catholic faith, that all that God created, including human nature, is good, and that not even personal sin can erase or obliterate the goodness of what God created, even if it can deface and distort it.

So as with most things the answer is found in the truth of the understanding of the person of Christ.

Keep in mind St John was made a deacon by St John Chrysostom, and was a close friend of Pope Leo the Great. A true east-west saint.

St John Cassian concludes:
Quote:

And therefore it is laid down by all the Catholic fathers who have taught perfection of heart not by empty disputes of words, but in deed and act, that the first stage in the Divine gift is for each man to be inflamed with the desire of everything that is good, but in such a way that the choice of free will is open to either side: and that the second stage in Divine grace is for the aforesaid practices of virtue to be able to be performed, but in such a way that the possibilities of the will are not destroyed: the third stage also belongs to the gifts of God, so that it may be held by the persistence of the goodness already acquired, and in such a way that the liberty may not be surrendered and experience bondage. For the God of all must be held to work in all, so as to incite, protect, and strengthen, but not to take away the freedom of the will which He Himself has once given. If however any more subtle inference of man's argumentation and reasoning seems opposed to this interpretation, it should be avoided rather than brought forward to the destruction of the faith (for we gain not faith from understanding, but understanding from faith, as it is written: "Except ye believe, ye will not understand") for how God works all things in us and yet everything can be ascribed to free will, cannot be fully grasped by the mind and reason of man

Monergism as taught by St Augustine or Luther or Calvin is not the universal faith of the fathers.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.