toldailytopic: Are some people born predestined to go to hell?
TOL Topic of the Day - Chime In!Every day we will post a new topic and we want to get your comments on that topic. The topic could be about literally anything from the vague to the specific, important or trivial. The TOL membership can take that topic and run with it!
Slogan/motto:
Luke 9:23 Then He said to them all, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me."
Reputation:
August 14th, 2012, 03:50 PM
I said "Simply disagreeing with him rather than counter-asserting your own distinct viewpoint of Christian relativism would be much more respectful."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Town Heretic
No, I meant exactly what I said. Christians owe each other a greater degree of respect in the non salvific judgments that separate us in our general walk, that distinguish Catholic from Baptist and Baptist from Episcopalian. So if you abstain from the drinking of alcohol and dancing or find the Rosary beneficial then God bless you and leave off the fellow who does if you don't.
I didn't. In fact I've congratulated him on finding the things that aid him in relation as a Christian. What I objected to was the insult contained in proposing that a different walk with Christ is an invitation to becoming reprobate. It was needless insult, divisive, condescending and unless he simply presumes that only Catholics are thoughtful and earnest in their faith, pointless.
That's a very funny way of noting my willingness to encourage him in his walk while entreating him not to disparage my own as a part of the process. Christian relativism? I thought you only just finished finding fault in my absolutism. No matter.
God bless you zip. I won't continue to engage on the point, having said what I meant to and being aware of how poorly our discussions have tended to turn and end.
You commit the same error here. The issues aren't mutually accepted as non-salvific, hence "your own distinct viewpoint of Christian relativism." Asserting that they are isn't doing anyone any good, and is no different from Trad telling you that the Rosary is necessary though you clearly disagree. It was odd to me that you rebuked him for undermining your beliefs and then blatantly undermined his own. I guess you don't see it yet.
"If a sheerly linguistic version of the gospel could be concocted, it would merely so be no longer the gospel. In the Lutheran Reformation’s understanding, which we believe in this matter to be correct, the sacraments make the inalienable externality of the gospel message and therefore are necessary to the authenticity of that message." (Christian Dogmatics [1984], II:302-303 as cited in Pontifications)
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for August 10th, 2012 02:21 PM
toldailytopic: Are some people born predestined to go to hell?
Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
Limbo is debatable and not held by the Church as certain. It is merely something of theologians. In fact, I don't believe it is all that popular anymore. The reason it was brought as an idea was to try and understand a few 'kinks' in the aspects of justification.
Purgatory and Hell, however, is certain and indoctrinated.
Limbo and purgatory are both poppycock.
Quote:
And what were you implying if you did not mean it was a 'happy place'? There is a pagan and then there is an orthodox version of Hades. In myth, it is simply the world of the dead. In Christianity, it is a place of damnation.
I said there was no mention of torture, I never said there was no torment.
Most definitely, they are called the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. God made them for that Purpose Rom 9:20-22
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
*
The only reference to predestiny is in the half of scripture you left out concerning the vessels prepared before unto mercy.
The lump of clay referred to was after the fall.
And people fit themselves for wrath, a murderer did not come out of his mother's womb with a tommygun in his hands, nor is the prostitute born wearing the make-up of Jezebel.
To sin successfully takes practice and steeling the mind and heart against God and conscience.
After the fall God would have been justified in destroying ALL mankind, but to avoid this [because He foreknew man would rebel] He so created man under the federal headship of Adam so that we all fall together, He predestined that some would be conformed to the image of His dear Son
WHY?
So that those so predestined might reach out in mercy to bless and lift the rest of mankind.
B57 will not judge this world, thank God, thank God nor do I have to, God will come and judge the living and the dead with perfect fairness.
Slogan/motto:
Try to be civil in the face of incivility. This is a test.
Reputation:
August 15th, 2012, 05:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totton Linnet
*
The only reference to predestiny is in the half of scripture you left out concerning the vessels prepared before unto mercy.
The lump of clay referred to was after the fall.
And people fit themselves for wrath, a murderer did not come out of his mother's womb with a tommygun in his hands, nor is the prostitute born wearing the make-up of Jezebel.
To sin successfully takes practice and steeling the mind and heart against God and conscience.
After the fall God would have been justified in destroying ALL mankind, but to avoid this [because He foreknew man would rebel] He so created man under the federal headship of Adam so that we all fall together, He predestined that some would be conformed to the image of His dear Son
WHY?
So that those so predestined might reach out in mercy to bless and lift the rest of mankind.
B57 will not judge this world, thank God, thank God nor do I have to, God will come and judge the living and the dead with perfect fairness.
God is fair in His dealings with His creation.
What good is reaching out if those to whom we reach are predestined to separation from the Lord?
Is this not an exercise in futility?
We are not destined to waste our time, rather, we, all of us, are to make good use of the gift of life.
There were, yes. But instead of going back to that, we'll see if he answers my question to him in my last post.
Not gonna lie. I was gonna take the coward's way out and let Zippy take over.
Quote:
Does God give those necessary graces to all people? I'm not talking about universal salvation here, which would be graces that are necessary and sufficient. I'm just talking about the necessary work on God's part that allows one to be saved. This is the question that I'm struggling to see a clear answer on your part to differentiate yourself from Calvinism.
These are very hard questions. Instead of dogmatically asserting a position, let's consider the following:
1. Is God (the Supreme Good) the cause of all created goods? Yes. Thus, all created goods, even whatever is good in man or what is good in what man does, is from God.
2. Can a man be saved apart from the grace and mercy of God? No. The reason for this is twofold. 1. Salvation is a supernatural end which exceeds the capacity of human nature, and 2. even were that not enough, man is even less suited to attain it than he naturally would be, given his fallen condition.
3. That said, is man a free agent, and must he cooperate in the divine plan? Again, the answer is yes. Man is a rational, living being.
From the above, it seems to follow that whatever good a man freely does, this good which we freely does at the same time 1. is the work of God's grace and 2. is at the same time the free cooperation of the free agent.
If you take away either, it seems as though this good would not be present. Take virtuous act A: but for the grace of God, I could not have done it. It is a good, and not only a good, but it's a good worked by man in possession of a fallen human nature. That said, my cooperation is also required. It is God's grace working in a human being (a rational being).
These seem to be rock solid premises. What conclusions do you draw, Kmo?
When a Man Lies He Murders
Some Part of the World
These Are the Pale Deaths Which
Men Miscall Their Lives
All this I Cannot Bear
to Witness Any Longer
Cannot the Kingdom of Salvation
Take Me Home
*
The only reference to predestiny is in the half of scripture you left out concerning the vessels prepared before unto mercy.
Predetermination is a virtual certainty with an omnipotent being involved. You can see this predetermination all the way through Scripture., every time you see prophesy and ultimatums which suspiciously always pave way to the continuing revelation by God.
The fact of the matter is that you have no choice but to accept predestination.
Slogan/motto:
Try to be civil in the face of incivility. This is a test.
Reputation:
August 15th, 2012, 10:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilenceInMotion
Predetermination is a virtual certainty with an omnipotent being involved. You can see this predetermination all the way through Scripture., every time you see prophesy and ultimatums which suspiciously always pave way to the continuing revelation by God.
The fact of the matter is that you have no choice but to accept predestination.
Then ultimately, you do not believe in an omnipotent being.
Perhaps your definition of power is not in alignment with God's definition of power. Do you think He must always stoop to Neanderathal power in order to influence His creatures? SilenceInMotion, what way in your every day behaviors do you display your belief in predestination? I'd be willing to guess you live your life as if you believe in free will.
Slogan/motto:
Luke 9:23 Then He said to them all, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me."
Reputation:
August 15th, 2012, 11:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traditio
Not gonna lie. I was gonna take the coward's way out and let Zippy take over.
I want no part of this.
Quote:
These are very hard questions. Instead of dogmatically asserting a position, let's consider the following:
1. Is God (the Supreme Good) the cause of all created goods? Yes. Thus, all created goods, even whatever is good in man or what is good in what man does, is from God.
2. Can a man be saved apart from the grace and mercy of God? No. The reason for this is twofold. 1. Salvation is a supernatural end which exceeds the capacity of human nature, and 2. even were that not enough, man is even less suited to attain it than he naturally would be, given his fallen condition.
3. That said, is man a free agent, and must he cooperate in the divine plan? Again, the answer is yes. Man is a rational, living being.
From the above, it seems to follow that whatever good a man freely does, this good which we freely does at the same time 1. is the work of God's grace and 2. is at the same time the free cooperation of the free agent.
If you take away either, it seems as though this good would not be present. Take virtuous act A: but for the grace of God, I could not have done it. It is a good, and not only a good, but it's a good worked by man in possession of a fallen human nature. That said, my cooperation is also required. It is God's grace working in a human being (a rational being).
These seem to be rock solid premises. What conclusions do you draw, Kmo?
There were, yes. But instead of going back to that, we'll see if he answers my question to him in my last post.
As noted, these are hard questions. Two "rock solid premises" result in a mysterious interaction between God's grace and man's will. It seems to me that Trad has emphasized one of those premises, but he always held the other and never actually fell into a Calvinistic position. I think you and TH read quite a bit of that in.
Can this mystery be solved to some extent? It seems to me that the modern transactional-type thinking which posits a zero-sum scenario between God's will and man's will is the culprit. A Thomistic philosophy which keeps in mind that fact that God actualizes all creatures and is even mysteriously present in man's will--even creating him to will the good in the first place--seems to be a good first step toward a better understanding. But these are deep waters. Maybe we should bring in AMR, Evo, and lots of ibuprofen.
"If a sheerly linguistic version of the gospel could be concocted, it would merely so be no longer the gospel. In the Lutheran Reformation’s understanding, which we believe in this matter to be correct, the sacraments make the inalienable externality of the gospel message and therefore are necessary to the authenticity of that message." (Christian Dogmatics [1984], II:302-303 as cited in Pontifications)
August 15th, 2012, 05:17 AM
August 15th, 2012, 10:37 AM
Linear Mode
