Author Topic: Free will and foreknowledge  (Read 2858 times)

Offline Arvinger

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Thanked: 231 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Free will and foreknowledge
« Reply #135 on: December 26, 2018, 04:59:45 PM »
That is what you said.  You said predestination logically entails either semi-Pelagianism or Calvinism.  Glad to see you've backtracked from that.  For if that were the case, Catholicism would be self-contradictory.

You misunderstood me. I wrote that all theological systems attempting to explain predestination (Thomism/Banezianism, Molinism) logically lead to Calvinism or semi-Pelagianism - all of them fail, which is why I say that predestination remains a mystery. I never said that predestination itself entails Calvinism or semi-Pelagianism.

I will answer to the rest later.
 

Offline Quaremerepulisti

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3823
  • Thanked: 1258 times
  • Religion: Catholic (Byzantine)
Re: Free will and foreknowledge
« Reply #136 on: December 26, 2018, 05:40:19 PM »
That is what you said.  You said predestination logically entails either semi-Pelagianism or Calvinism.  Glad to see you've backtracked from that.  For if that were the case, Catholicism would be self-contradictory.

You misunderstood me. I wrote that all theological systems attempting to explain predestination (Thomism/Banezianism, Molinism) logically lead to Calvinism or semi-Pelagianism - all of them fail, which is why I say that predestination remains a mystery. I never said that predestination itself entails Calvinism or semi-Pelagianism.

That is what you wrote in the previous post I responded to.  It might not be what you intended to write, or what you thought you wrote.  But it is what you wrote.

Quote
But that is a separate issue, and has to do with the fact that we will never fully understand predestination (no matter how you slice it, taken to its logical conclusion it ends up either with semi-Pelagianism or Calvinism - but both are wrong)...

Anyway, all theological systems fail to explain predestination.  Why am I not justified in throwing all of them out?
 

Offline Arvinger

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Thanked: 231 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Free will and foreknowledge
« Reply #137 on: December 26, 2018, 06:38:19 PM »
That is what you wrote in the previous post I responded to.  It might not be what you intended to write, or what you thought you wrote.  But it is what you wrote.

Quote
But that is a separate issue, and has to do with the fact that we will never fully understand predestination (no matter how you slice it, taken to its logical conclusion it ends up either with semi-Pelagianism or Calvinism - but both are wrong)...

Indeed, that was poorly worded by me. What I meant is that if you try to explain predestination through a theological system it ends up either in Calvinism or semi-Pelagianism - but of course we know that explanation exists, whether we are capable of understanding it in this world or not. I wrote more specifically later on:

Quote from: Arvinger
So far we don't have an explanation - Thomism, Banezianism and Molinism all fail on different, but crucial points, as their logical conclusions lead to Calvinism or semi-Pelagianism. However, we know that there is no contradiction between God wanting to save all and God not predestining all, because the Church teaches both (and the Church cannot contradict herself). So, predestination remains a mystery, but there is no contradiction, and there cannot be.


Quote from: Quaremerepulisti
Anyway, all theological systems fail to explain predestination.  Why am I not justified in throwing all of them out?

You are, the Church never made a definitive pronouncement in regard to how predestination works, so there is no binding system we have to adhere to. And I agree with you that all theological systems proposed so far which attempt to explain predestination are flawed (I think you argument against Thomism/Banezianism is irrefutable).