Predestination

[Vince]

Continuing our study of the word "grace," it appears in Acts 24:27:

But after two years Porcius Festus succeeded Felix; and Felix, wanting to do the Jews a favor, left Paul bound.

The word "favor" is the Greek word "charis," translated "grace" most of the time. It is the same Greek word used for "By grace are you saved through faith."

As you can see from the passage, the word means "favor," "kindness," "kind act," "graciousness," "unmerited favor." But it cannot possibly mean "irresistible force."

 

[savedbygrace57]

glory:

So you say man, himself, has nothing to do with it?

Except he is the object that is made to do it. The predestinated, were predestined to perform Good works, thats all part of their being made a new creation eph 2:

10For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Man has nothing to do with his creation. Ask Adam..lol

 

[thecounsellors]

Hello everyone. I am very interested in this topic.

 

[francisdesales]

LOL, I have nothing against francisdesales as a person, I dont even know him in person though. I don't want to speak for him, but I would be so shocked...... I would literally sit behind my screen with my mouth hanging open and would be speechless if he actually thinks of me as a theological "ally."

I prefer to think we are more like-minded then you would allow - I prefer to focus on what we share in common regarding theology and work from there - so as to submit to the Lord's desire that "all may be one".

I must admit to chuckling when I read what you wrote... Until the arrival of francis, I was a heretic believing the lies of Satan. Now suddenly you and I should be good ole homies and be allies against Francisdesales?

I agree. We shouldn't gang up on francisdesales!

 

[francisdesales]

I see no problem reading the Early Church Fathers. The ECFs had some good things to say, but they also had some errors. The problem here is that you see the ECFs as Roman Catholic.

Mondar,

I don't know if you are aware of this, but the ECF never call themselves "Roman Catholic". There is no such distinction (between Roman and non-Roman Catholics) until the Anglicans made that distinction during the invention of their "branch" theory - Roman, Orthodox and Anglican Catholics... There is no one mention of "Roman Catholic Church" in any official documents for the first millenium of the Church. Augustine certainly does not call himself "Roman Catholic". There is only one Catholic Church. The term "Roman" refers to the rite, today. The rituals specific to Rome, viz a viz Byzantium or Assyrian Catholics, who all follow Peter and his successors.

Thus, technically speaking, the term "Roman" should not be used, since they never considered themselves "Roman" Catholic or "Syrian" Catholic or "Assyrian" Catholic, just plain Catholic - THE universal Church established by Christ...

This is an assertion you cannot prove. Show me where the ECFs taught the bodily assumption of Mary. Show me in the ECFs where they taught the infallibility of the Popes when they speak ex-cathedra and then I will believe that the ECFs were Roman Catholic.

I can, but that would be a off topic. St. Gregory of Tours and St. John Damascene taught the former, and numerous spoke of the Bishop of Rome having received a special "knack" for teaching without error, which can only be attributed to God. My primary goal here is to correct some thoughts on Augustine and the ECF's.

Also, I don't agree that all men's works are cursed by God. That is a position not taught in the scriptures. The writings of past men are no more good or evil then any other book in the book store today. Also, while I affirm sola scruptura, I would not agree that the proper view of the Christian life is that you go out and sit down with just you, your bible, and God. God gave the Church men with spiritual gifts... teachers, pastors, etc. These men are gifted men, and there for a reason. They should be heard in as much as they properly teach and practice scripture. I agree scripture is the only infallible and innerrant authority, but I do not agree that is it the only thing in Christianity that God gave us.

See, Mondar, we can agree again!

You talk of the Catholic view of Augustine here. It is interesting to me that you view Augustine as a Roman Catholic. Your views of Augustine are in a way, very Catholic. Actually, you and Francisdesales agree in places... you both think Augustine was Roman Catholic.

He was the Catholic bishop of Hippo, he certainly was Catholic. As to "Roman", see above. He certainly vouched for the primacy of the Roman bishop, that is without doubt, defending it against a number of different heretics, such as the Donatists, Manicheans, and the Pelagians.

Augustine never wrote about Mary worship, he did not support idolatry after his conversion.

Non-sequitar, no ECF does, nor does the Catholic Church support either of the two...

On the other hand he support the state Church, he had a view of baptismal regeneration and the bodily presence (but not transubstantiation).

Another non-sequitar, since the "term" was not invented yet. However, the idea of transubstantiation stems from the idea that the elements change into the Body and Blood of Christ. Thus, he did teach the idea of transubstantiation without calling it that. I can cite several places where he distinctly calls the "Bread" the Body of Christ. Thus, the "transubstantiation".

You claim to have been converted from Catholicism, but what are you converted to? If you now believe in sola gratia (Salvation by grace alone) (I assume). Should not your attitude be one of love and grace toward Catholics.

Yea, how about givin' us some love!

We are indeed brothers, separated perhaps, but we still have the same major beliefs. There is enough hatred in the world without Christians feeling it necessary to provide for more against their own... Disagree, but do it in love, out of the desire to "correct" what you feel is an error, recognizing that we are all "working out our salvation in fear and trembling" in Christ.

A person who cannot do this is not a disciple of Christ, pure and simple.

Regards

 

[Vince]

The Christians as Ephesus were confused. Their lives clearly showed that they were doing more good works than they had ever done before, and they were doing more good works than their neighbors.

In Ephesians 2:8-9, Paul explains to them that they are not saved by these good works. He explained that by God's kindness, they had been saved by their faith, not their works.

But what about their additional good works? In verse 10, Paul explains that they are God's workmanship, created unto good works. Their good works were the result of the change God had brought in them when they accepted Christ. This agrees with the Biblical doctrine that all who accept Christ are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. But nowhere does this or any other passage teach that they were predestined to accept Christ.

 

[mondar]

Another non-sequitar, since the "term" was not invented yet. However, the idea of transubstantiation stems from the idea that the elements change into the Body and Blood of Christ. Thus, he did teach the idea of transubstantiation without calling it that. I can cite several places where he distinctly calls the "Bread" the Body of Christ. Thus, the "transubstantiation".

And I would of course contend that merely calling the "Bread" the "Body of Christ" would suggest Augustine believed in the "real presence" but not transubstantiation. The Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation would also fit Augustine's language.

Concerning the other things in your post... When I did complain that Vince was being very anachronistic in reading modern Roman Catholicism back into Augustine. I am glad to hear you are not trying to make him Roman Catholic. That is interesting.

 

[mondar]

The Christians as Ephesus were confused. Their lives clearly showed that they were doing more good works than they had ever done before, and they were doing more good works than their neighbors.

In Ephesians 2:8-9, Paul explains to them that they are not saved by these good works. He explained that by God's kindness, they had been saved by their faith, not their works.

But what about their additional good works? In verse 10, Paul explains that they are God's workmanship, created unto good works. Their good works were the result of the change God had brought in them when they accepted Christ. This agrees with the Biblical doctrine that all who accept Christ are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. But nowhere does this or any other passage teach that they were predestined to accept Christ.

Vince, it is disappointing to see you go all over the place and ignore any arguments put forth. Is that not a sign of a failed argument on your part?

So you don't have to "accept Christ" to be conformed to the image of his son? How does that fit with Romans 8?

In the Romans 8 passage... (ASV)
Rom 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
In this passage, justification happens only to those called, and predestined. Tell me Vince, what is justification to you?

 

[Vince]

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,

During the seventeenth century, irresistible grace was invented to patch a fatal flaw in Calvinism. Both the Bible and history confirm that no one had believed in, or even heard of, irresistible grace before then. Humorously enough, John Calvin didn't believe in it, nor did the Dutch Reformed Church (which invented the concept).

Based neither on Scripture nor on a misunderstanding of Scripture, it is rejected by most Christians. But many Christians accept an error that accompanies it: that grace is a "force." And we have seen from the Bible and the dictionary that "grace" is a kindness, not a force.

 

[francisdesales]

And I would of course contend that merely calling the "Bread" the "Body of Christ" would suggest Augustine believed in the "real presence" but not transubstantiation. The Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation would also fit Augustine's language.

Perhaps, but Augustine calls it "Jesus", not "Jesus and a piece of bread"...

Concerning the other things in your post... When I did complain that Vince was being very anachronistic in reading modern Roman Catholicism back into Augustine. I am glad to hear you are not trying to make him Roman Catholic. That is interesting.

I had never heard anyone make the claim that Augustine was not Catholic... Very odd. My point was just to remind you that "Roman" is not a term we use to describe ourselves, unless we are distinguishing between other Eastern Catholics. "Reading back modern Roman Catholicism" into Augustine is not exactly an weighty charge, considering Western Catholicism is based significantly upon Augustine interpretations and writings of Apostolic Tradition and Scriptures.

If you were to discuss details with a Greek Orthodox, you would see this was true, esp. on grace/nature, Trinity and original sin. The East and West take some slight differences based upon Augustine.

As to "making him Roman Catholic", you should know by experience that that is not my primary goal in discussing such issues. Such matters are in the hands of the Holy Spirit.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Hello everyone. I am very interested in this topic.

thecounselors,


What specifically are you interested in, the OP, or this recent "side" discussion?

Regards

 

[savedbygrace57]

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,

This is speaking of predestinated grace being given and applied to all men that it was given to in Christ before the world began..

2 tim 1:

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given [appointed] us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

This grace brings salvation in its regeneration strength and saves experientially titus 3:


5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

It actually brings salvation and teaches experientially vs 12

 

[savedbygrace57]

vince:

And we have seen from the Bible and the dictionary that "grace" is a kindness, not a force.

Thats error, Gods grace is a force ! It reigns rom 5:21

That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

The word reign is the greek word

basileuō and means:

to be king, to exercise kingly power, to reign
metaph. to exercise the highest influence, to control

Gods grace is a force in that it is:

energy, strength, or active power

Paul said in 1 cor 15:

10But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.


The Grace of God laboured which word means:
to labour with wearisome effort, to toil

Paul laboured by the effort and effects of the Grace of God that was with Him..

Yes, Grace is a unmerited kindness as well, but to deny it being a spiritual force is false, and not the Truth..

 

[Vince]

"This is speaking of predestinated grace"

The phrase "predestinated grace" does not appear anywhere in Scripture.

Meanwhile, Acts 7:51 is often used to refute irresistible grace: "You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you." Since the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, and they always resisted the Holy Spirit, the Sanhedrin must have resisted this grace. On the other hand, the word "grace" is conspicuously absent from the passage.

Since grace is a kindness, not a force, it cannot be irresistible. But what else did the Sanhedrin resist?

John 16:8 And when He [the Holy Spirit] has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

 

[savedbygrace57]

vince:

Since grace is a kindness, not a force

See post 480 !

 

[Vince]

In blending the pagan doctrine of unconditional election with the Biblical doctrine of salvation by faith, Saint Augustine invented the new doctrine that unsaved people cannot respond to or learn from God. We'll be staying in Romans 1 for a while while explaining this error.

Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,"

Not only do the lost clearly see God's invisible attributes, but they understand them.

 

[farouk]

Meanwhile, Acts 7:51 is often used to refute irresistible grace
...

V:

How about, instead, John 6.65? (Hard to dismiss, since in the next verse people who were not humbled at the idea of dependence on God's grace departed from the Lord Jesus and walked no more with Him.)

 

[Vince]

Good to her from you, Farouk.


No one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him. However, the Father teaches all men. Those who accept that teaching, rather than resist the Father's drawing, are brought to Christ. The same principle applies to the grace of God that brings salvation appearing to all men, Jesus enlightening every man who comes into the world, God granting repentance to all men, and Jesus drawing all men to Himself. Those who do not reject these calls are brought to Christ.

The passage you referred to mentions that Judas was not saved. He had responded to God's grace, but perhaps because of his greed, he had turned back in his heart without ever accepting Christ. Although he was an Apostle, winning people to Christ, casting out demons, and raising the dead, it was never given to Judas to accept Christ because he had rejected Him in his heart.

 

[savedbygrace57]

vince:

However, the Father teaches all men.

Not all men without exception. Thats a false statement..

 

[Vince]

Getting back to Romans 1, we have seen from verse 20 that unsaved men do clearly see and understand spiritual things: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,"

The previous verse tells us "19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them." The context clearly shows that God is giving this spiritual revelation of Himself to lost people, and that they do receive and understand it.