Inerrancy And Inspiration Of The Bible

[KnightofChrist]

Alright, I can accept the premise that grace is inherently present in everyone, but that still doesn't explain the who granting of faith issue. If God so desires everyone to love him and abide with him, why not grant everyone that gift? It doesn't contradict free will because you can reject gifts. However, one cannot be faulted for their disbelief in God if they never had the gift in the first place.

Again how can you know for certain that the gift has not been given but not accepted?

[Apotheoun]

Alright, I can accept the premise that grace is inherently present in everyone, but that still doesn't explain the who granting of faith issue. If God so desires everyone to love him and abide with him, why not grant everyone that gift? It doesn't contradict free will because you can reject gifts. However, one cannot be faulted for their disbelief in God if they never had the gift in the first place.

The act of faith is a gift of the grace present in man, but man's free will also has a part in it. A man must be receptive to God's activity in him, but if he is not receptive the grace (and faith that comes from it) will remain as a seed ever present and ready to become fruitful. Salvation has already been given to every man through incarnation, but whether that salvation will be blissful or painful is left to each individual to determine by his response to God's call. Now that call is made both internally, that is, by the grace that is always drawing man to His creator and final end, and externally through the preaching of the Church. Nevertheless, neither the internal nor the external call of God is irresistible. Man is, and always will be, free.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

Again how can you know for certain that the gift has not been given but not accepted?

That is what St. Gregory Palamas teaches in his treatise entitled "Capita Physica." God is present in everything and is always calling mankind to His embrace, but He will not force anyone to love Him. But the gift is there even if it is not accepted or acted upon.

[KnightofChrist]

One can't. But how do you accept a gift you don't even know you have? One assumes that there must be some kind of push from God, some reason to accept the gift of faith.

Those that have never heard of Christ or His Church could perhaps not understand they have been given the gift of faith. But most societies have acknowledged that there is a gift of faith, or belief at least in a god and misused it for false worship. But still it is perhaps some evidence that written in the heart of man is the truth that there is a God, someone greater than ourselves.

But for someone that has heard the Gospel of Christ and of the Church, there would seem to be a much weaker claim to ignorance. Since they have been taught they do have the gift of faith, but have chosen not to take it up, or doubt they have been given the gift.

[Apotheoun]

One can't. But how do you accept a gift you don't even know you have? One assumes that there must be some kind of push from God, some reason to accept the gift of faith.

There was a time in my life when I worked very hard to convince myself that I had faith, and it was only when I gave up trying to do that that I really came to have faith. I do not believe in God because I have somehow convinced myself that there is a God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); instead, I believe because I gave up trying to convince myself. Like St. Gregory, I surrendered all that I thought I knew, and in doing that I found God.

[Fidei Defensor]

Those that have never heard of Christ or His Church could perhaps not understand they have been given the gift of faith. But most societies have acknowledged that there is a gift of faith, or belief at least in a god and misused it for false worship. But still it is perhaps some evidence that written in the heart of man is the truth that there is a God, someone greater than ourselves.

But for someone that has heard the Gospel of Christ and of the Church, there would seem to be a much weaker claim to ignorance. Since they have been taught they do have the gift of faith, but have chosen not to take it up, or doubt they have been given the gift.

You assume that the person somehow knows that this faith is true but choose to reject it. This isn't usually the case. The only real example that illustrates that would be someone who choses to worship satan and reject God. They know that there is a God but willingly reject him.

 

In reality, those who don't believe in God aren't doing it out of spite—they hold convictions other than those you hold.  And if what Apo is saying is true, they can't be faulted for that, because one can't will themselves into belief.  If they don't believe in God and find no reason to, and they can only come to faith if they are led by a gift from God, it seems correct to assume that they should remain blameless for their lack of belief.

[Apotheoun]

You assume that the person somehow knows that this faith is true but choose to reject it. This isn't usually the case. The only real example that illustrates that would be someone who choses to worship satan and reject God. They know that there is a God but willingly reject him.

 

In reality, those who don't believe in God aren't doing it out of spite—they hold convictions other than those you hold.  And if what Apo is saying is true, they can't be faulted for that, because one can't will themselves into belief.  If they don't believe in God and find no reason to, and they can only come to faith if they are led by a gift from God, it seems correct to assume that they should remain blameless for their lack of belief.

As far as culpability for non-belief is concerned, only God - and the person concerned perhaps to some degree - can know anything about that.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Fidei Defensor]

As far as culpability for non-belief is concerned, only God - and the person concerned perhaps to some degree - can know anything about that.

That is essentially the answer I was looking for.  I think the benefit of the doubt should be given to even the most staunch atheists because if there is a god, only he knows the mind and soul of that person.

Edited March 28, 2013 by tardis ad astra

[Apotheoun]

That is essentially the answer I was looking for.  I think the benefit of the doubt should be given to even the most staunch atheists because if there is a god, only he knows the mind and soul of that person.

I am not in a position to give the benefit of the doubt to anyone, nor would any judgment I make about a person's soul matter, which is why I do not make those kinds of judgments. I take a person at his word, and make my judgments accordingly. God alone can see into a person's heart and so He alone can determine who is culpable for error and who is not. When I make a judgment, I am not judging the person, I am judging only the person's actions.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

(I should say that despite my lack of respect for religion, I deeply respect you and your intelligence. You make discussion worthwhile.)

Thank you for your kind words. I have enjoyed our conversations too. I want you to know that I am praying for you, and I hope that you find what you are looking for. Life is a journey and you never know where you will end up. In my own case, I doubt I would have believed it if someone had told me thirty years ago that I would eventually become an Eastern Catholic. Heck, thirty years ago I did not even know there were Eastern Catholic Churches.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

The debate board has been dry lately. Lets shake that up!

 

What basis is there to claim that the Bible is inerrant and inspired by God? 

 

Catholics place a lot of emphasis on Tradition being the major source of confidence in the collection of writings that makes up the Bible. However, what about other writings that were circulating in early Christianity that didn't make it into the Bible? What is the basis for rejecting those writings but accepting the ones that are in the Bible?

 

Ready, set, go!

 

I have embarked on the reading of a church history book and the thing with early writings is most meaning 99 percent of them where burnt along with the martyrs as well as holy pictures,and this continued through time to this day, although it doesn't happen in the west but there are still groups doing as such in the 3rd world.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

When i read holy scripture sometimes it answers more than just my pysical questions about life but it answers the spiritual questions of who am i,where did i come from and where do i go? And it answers many more questions like why are there seemingly natural consequences to some things that can't be avoided, ie: sin and how do i cope with these consequences or better yet how do i avoid sin,and what is sin really? Questions like these the holy bible answers for me.

 

Onward christian souls.

JESUS iz LORD.

[T-fish]

I just don't understand how you can say that on one hand, faith is a gift and so those without it cannot reason into it but rather must be granted the grace to have it, but then on the other hand say that God won't stand in the way of free will and so men are free to choose.  How can one be truly choosing if they aren't granted the gift of faith in the first place?

 

It's not as if I secretly know deep down that God is real but I reject him anyway. So do I have the grace of faith or not? And if I don't, how could I be seen as choosing to separate myself from God and go to hell?

God don't have to like what He creates. Remember Noah and others....

Do you have kids? You may give one kid a gift and not the other. So some of us are cursed with the gift of faith and then there's others who think they have that gift, but really they don't....the latter will push you away from God even further.

 

Reject God, your life on earth will be much better...and those who have the grace of faith will ask God to pray for you and then be jealous because you didn't get the gift of faith. :P

Pax, not Paxil.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

You assume that the person somehow knows that this faith is true but choose to reject it. This isn't usually the case. The only real example that illustrates that would be someone who choses to worship satan and reject God. They know that there is a God but willingly reject him.

I always found this idea strange. If you believe there is a God, why would you side with the losing team? When it comes down to whether God exists or whether Catholicism is the right religion, there is not enough objective convincing evidence for either. 

Edited April 23, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl