Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]

Author Topic: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants  (Read 26152 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 11975
  • Reputation: +7525/-2254
  • Gender: Male
Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
« Reply #120 on: March 19, 2025, 01:26:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    My darker side comes out when I am "discussing" something and my "opponent" fails to appreciate a critical distinction that they either ignore or purposely evade because it is damaging to their inclined view, so reason be damned.
    I totally understand. 

    Quote
    I sometimes feel you do that in discussion, and I get frustrated with you. But again, I've done the same myself in the past.
    Honestly, many times I don't follow 100% what you're trying to say because you write in generalities too much (for me, personally).  I like specific examples, because it makes the conversation clearer.  You might object to something I write and say "Well, you're just contradicting St Thomas".  I might be, and you might be correct, but if you don't point out the EXACT contradiction, I'm left to ASSUME what you meant.  Especially when multiple points are being discussed, many times I'm left to guess what you mean.

    Not your fault.  It's just this mode of communication, especially on complex topics, leads to misunderstandings.

    Quote
    As  to Denzinger, yes I agree with all of those propositions. Where did you get the list, or how did you put it together?  Interesting.
    I found it on some catholic site.  Yes, I agree with all these propositions as well.

    Quote
    I hope we can reach agreement.
    I thought we were in agreement, just misunderstanding each other.
    Logged

    Online Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2313
    • Reputation: +1277/-762
    • Gender: Female
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #121 on: March 19, 2025, 01:54:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 19, 2025, 01:18:39 PM
    Job was an Isrealite who followed God's Law.  Plato was a pagan (who some say lived a 'naturally good life').  The difference is night and day.  Similar to a Catholic vs a 'good natured Hindu'.
    Ok. Please excuse my ignorance.

    Job, wasn't Jєωιѕн? Correct?

    Old Testament
    Jew = chosen people
    Job (wouldn't Moses wife'sfamily be in this same camp?) = follower of God's law
    Plato = pagan

    Now times
    Catholic = true Christians
    Protestant (assumption is that they have been baptized properly)= try to follow God's law
    Hindu = pagan


    This is just a simple outline, by no means does it mean anything dogmatic, nor am I trying to change the teachings of the Church in anyway.  I am just trying to put pieces together.

    Again please ignore, if I am going too far off track.
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11975
    • Reputation: +7525/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #122 on: March 19, 2025, 02:46:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    Job, wasn't Jєωιѕн? Correct?

    Old Testament
    Jew = chosen people
    Job (wouldn't Moses wife'sfamily be in this same camp?) = follower of God's law
    Plato = pagan
    Job was Jєωιѕн.  He followed God's law.  In the Old Testament, there was no middle/protestant group.  Either Jєωιѕн or Gentile/pagan.

    Logged

    Offline AMDG forever

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 45
    • Reputation: +30/-32
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #123 on: March 19, 2025, 03:16:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 19, 2025, 02:46:24 PM
    Job was Jєωιѕн.  He followed God's law.  In the Old Testament, there was no middle/protestant group.  Either Jєωιѕн or Gentile/pagan.

    Job was not Jєωιѕн.:facepalm:
    Logged

    Offline AMDG forever

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 45
    • Reputation: +30/-32
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #124 on: March 19, 2025, 03:18:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 19, 2025, 01:26:28 PM
    I totally understand. 
    Honestly, many times I don't follow 100% what you're trying to say because you write in generalities too much (for me, personally).  I like specific examples, because it makes the conversation clearer.  You might object to something I write and say "Well, you're just contradicting St Thomas".  I might be, and you might be correct, but if you don't point out the EXACT contradiction, I'm left to ASSUME what you meant.  Especially when multiple points are being discussed, many times I'm left to guess what you mean.

    Not your fault.  It's just this mode of communication, especially on complex topics, leads to misunderstandings.
    I found it on some catholic site.  Yes, I agree with all these propositions as well.
    I thought we were in agreement, just misunderstanding each other.

    Can you please use the quote “button” in the upper right so we know who you are quoting?
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11975
    • Reputation: +7525/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #125 on: March 19, 2025, 03:36:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Job was not Jєωιѕн.:facepalm: title=facepalm
    You are technically correct, but for purposes of this discussion, Job was a follower of God's law.

    Job lived in the times AFTER the Garden of Eden, but before Moses.  Many say that Job was a relative of Abraham.  But the term "Israelites" didn't even exist when Job was alive.

    There were basically 2 camps of religious people in those days....those who worshipped the True God and those who didn't.  So, you are correct, Job wasn’t “Jєωιѕн” (nobody was, in his time) but he was a worshiper of the same God, Jehovah, as was Abraham.

    For purposes of this discussion, would Job have believed in the coming Redeemer?  If he believed in Jehovah and followed the 10 Commandments, then yes.  Ergo, belief in the Redeemer made him "pre-Jєωιѕн" or "pre-Israelite"....i.e. he followed the true religion (at the time he lived).


    Plato lived much later in time, when the Israelite religion was mature and known by the Greeks.  Plato was not Jєωιѕн, nor an Israelite.  Plato did not worship the True God.
    Logged

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2312
    • Reputation: +867/-144
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #126 on: March 19, 2025, 06:47:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 19, 2025, 01:26:28 PM
    I totally understand. 
    Honestly, many times I don't follow 100% what you're trying to say because you write in generalities too much (for me, personally).  I like specific examples, because it makes the conversation clearer.  You might object to something I write and say "Well, you're just contradicting St Thomas".  I might be, and you might be correct, but if you don't point out the EXACT contradiction, I'm left to ASSUME what you meant.  Especially when multiple points are being discussed, many times I'm left to guess what you mean.

    Not your fault.  It's just this mode of communication, especially on complex topics, leads to misunderstandings.
    I found it on some catholic site.  Yes, I agree with all these propositions as well.
    I thought we were in agreement, just misunderstanding each other.

    I'll try to be clearer. 
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2312
    • Reputation: +867/-144
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #127 on: March 19, 2025, 06:58:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on March 19, 2025, 11:40:29 AM
    Very interesting discussion.

    A couple questions for my own clarity.

    1) How are Job and Plato different from each other? Job believed in God. Did Plato? I thought the assumption is Job is in Heaven and Plato is in the top portion of Hell.

    2)  As for infants who die before Baptism, I thought it was taught that in God's mercy, He allows this because if they lived they might have a worse spot in Hell. How does this fit with the discussion?

    Please ignore if you think the answers will derail the conversation.

    The case of infants who die before baptism affords an opportunity to focus on the ultimate questions regarding grace, Predestination, God's will to save, those kinds of ultimate questions. It does so because of the Catholic dogma of the necessity of baptism, and the implications of that necessity in their particular case, where they are not able to be saved without the sacrament. 

    Indeed, God is merciful to them, not tormenting them in hell, despite their condemnation as sons of Adam. 

    Their particular relevance with regard to my recent discussion with Pax is, he says that God foresees that they would commit mortal sins (and die in that state) if they were to go on to adulthood, so he exercises mercy by ending their lives early. But Pax was taking a position against God's election being determinative and indeed selective with regard to a man's salvation, without consideration of a particular individual's choices or actions.

    So I pointed out to him that God's taking the lives of these infants in their infancy - to prevent their damnation - just proves His particular and selective election of men, since other men he lets mature and commit their mortal sins, which he likewise foresaw, as He did with the infants he took early, but He let those others go on to work their way to hell. 

    Welcome, since we've never communicated here before.  
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11975
    • Reputation: +7525/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #128 on: March 19, 2025, 07:11:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    But Pax was taking a position against God's election being determinative and indeed selective with regard to a man's salvation, without consideration of a particular individual's choices or actions.
    I still hold this position.  God does not save anyone UNLESS they cooperate with grace.  There has to be cooperation of the human will to be saved (for those with the use of reason).

    Quote
    So I pointed out to him that God's taking the lives of these infants in their infancy - to prevent their damnation - just proves His particular and selective election of men
    The case of infants is not exactly "selective election" since infants aren't saved.  But neither are infants damned. 

    In the case of a BAPTIZED infant who dies young, yes, God definitely acted before such infants used their personal free will.  But as our Faith teaches, (and allows) the Godparents speak for the infant at baptism and also the prayers of the catholic parents availeth to the salvation of the infant, as is their duty.

    Decem, you seem to be attempting to make an "either-or" argument.  But the answer is that both views are correct. 
    1) Free will matters for salvation. 
    2) God does act, in certain circuмstances, when free will is not involved, in regards to salvation.

    Denzinger says the same thing.  This is not a contradiction, but a mystery.
    Logged

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2312
    • Reputation: +867/-144
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #129 on: March 19, 2025, 07:15:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 19, 2025, 07:11:52 PM
    I still hold this position.  God does not save anyone UNLESS they cooperate with grace.  There has to be cooperation of the human will to be saved (for those with the use of reason).
    The case of infants is not exactly "selective election" since infants aren't saved.  But neither are infants damned. 

    In the case of a BAPTIZED infant who dies young, yes, God definitely acted before such infants used their personal free will.  But as our Faith teaches, (and allows) the Godparents speak for the infant at baptism and also the prayers of the catholic parents availeth to the salvation of the infant, as is their duty.

    Decem, you seem to be attempting to make an "either-or" argument.  But the answer is that both views are correct. 
    1) Free will matters for salvation. 
    2) God does act, in certain circuмstances, when free will is not involved, in regards to salvation.

    Denzinger says the same thing.  This is not a contradiction, but a mystery.

    Pax, 

    See, you keep throwing up these red herrings: I NEVER SAID THERE WASN'T THE COOPERATION OF THE WILL. You start off tilting against an imaginary opponent. 

    This is why it's frustrating talking to you. It's like you're talking to someone else. 
    Logged
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11975
    • Reputation: +7525/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #130 on: March 19, 2025, 07:24:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Decem, you said in the first quote “Pax took this position…”

    Then in the next paragraph you said “But I pointed out to him…”

    The way you wrote this, implies that my position was wrong because your phrase “I pointed out to him” implies that you corrected me.  

    I don’t know of any other way to interpret what you wrote.  I said A.  You pointed out B.  You never said you agreed with A.  And you implied that B was correct.  It’s very confusing.  
    Logged

    Offline Predestination2

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 501
    • Reputation: +113/-119
    • Gender: Male
    Re: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants
    « Reply #131 on: March 19, 2025, 09:02:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Those before the age of reason have something called remote sufficient grace 
    Logged
    Vatican 2 was worse than both WW1 and WW2 combined.
    So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 
    Tried 6,000,000 pushups, only got to 271K
    Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]
    « previous next »