De Principiis (On First Principles)

[Ruth]

Clark wrote: "So to say that this verse proves that animals have souls is to say that the Hebrew word "spirit, breath, wind" means "soul." That translation can be defended if one defines "soul" very precisely in a certain way. But on the simple face of it the verse does not say "soul". (If I misunderstood what you are saying, Ruth, please correct me.)"
No you did not misunderstand. This is very interesting what you say, and proves that the people that instructed me very probably oversimplified things. I am glad that you point it out.

My current pastor also says that one cannot have a simple scheme deduced from the bible, because so many words are used, with different meanings over time.

Still, I think it is very interesting to ponder these things, and to learn more about what exactly was written in the Bible and by the Church Fathers.
So long as you don't want a simple scheme, it is very interesting to see the wide spectrum of ideas and views on our inner life, and how we relate to God, and to creation.

[Ruth]

Nemo wrote: "Speaking of quantum mechanics, I like this saying by Werner Heisenberg.

I think that modern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical ..."

Oh, I will certainly try and remember that saying, it is wonderful!
I really think this helps in having a more holistic view of things.
I find myself often wondering how it can be that my soul influences my body and vice versa when they seem to be such different natures and completely unrelated.
Perhaps I am seeing a distinction that just isn't there, only conceptually.

[Nemo]

Susan wrote: "How (or why?) could the grace of God overrule the free will of man? Could you explain the Calvinist position more thoroughly for me? Thanks..."

I cannot explain Calvin's position more thoroughly than he did himself. :)

Institutes of Christian Religion Bk. II Ch. 5. Section 15 might answer your specific question:
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/inst...

(I wrote a blogpost summarizing Calvin's position as I understand it, and presenting some counter-arguments.)

Both Origen and Calvin were well-versed in the Scriptures, and wrote extensive commentaries on them. And yet, they came away with apparently opposite understandings of free will and grace, both supported by the Scripture.

[Susan]

Nemo wrote: "Susan wrote: "How (or why?) could the grace of God overrule the free will of man? Could you explain the Calvinist position more thoroughly for me? Thanks..."

I cannot explain Calvin's position mor..."

Thanks. Looking forward to reading your sources.

[Susan]

Nemo wrote: "Susan wrote: "How (or why?) could the grace of God overrule the free will of man? Could you explain the Calvinist position more thoroughly for me? Thanks..."

I cannot explain Calvin's position mor..."

I personally think you can explain Calvin's position better than him! :) I have a difficult time following fully what they are expressing themselves sometimes...I enjoyed your blog post. Calvin seems to have a faulty understanding to me, one that does not follow through consistently with all the rest of the elements. I think I understand you to be saying that Calvin is giving God all the glory when we 'choose' correctly, in light of His grace, as we are corrupted...but as you explain, it is all ultimately due to God's grace (as He created us and sustains us continually), but if there is no element truly of our free will, where would be the love in that? Would we not just be mere automatons, created by His will, and moved solely by His will...would we not be mere playthings to Him, like a little boy lining up his soldiers in the way he fancies? Is not the element of love and freely chosen attention/devotion towards Him the whole point of everything? It doesn't make sense to me, but I am probably missing a lot! Thanks.

[Clark]

Nemo said, "Both Origen and Calvin were well-versed in the Scriptures, and wrote extensive commentaries on them. And yet, they came away with apparently opposite understandings of free will and grace, both supported by the Scripture."

I react to this problem in a new topic over in "Doctrine Matters." I defer to you as to whether or not that's the right place for my post; and indeed you should delete my post if it is not suitable for the Reading the Church Fathers group.

[Nemo]

Clark wrote: "Nemo said, "Both Origen and Calvin were well-versed in the Scriptures, and wrote extensive commentaries on them. And yet, they came away with apparently opposite understandings of free will and gra..."

In Bk. IV, Origen shows that the Scriptures are divinely inspired. I think this is very much related to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, deficient though the latter might be.

Thank you for starting the topic. I think it is very important for every Christian, especially in the present challenging time, but I'm afraid we're not well equipped for it.

[Ruth]

Hi all, sorry I haven't been very active in this group lately. I had a lot in my mind. Among other things I worked on my blog that is now online.
The latest post is for a large part based on what I learned here, and I refer to this thread, so I thought I'd share it.

http://www.consideringlilies.nl/touch...

And I certainly plan on being more involved again after the Christmas holidays. Merry Christmas to you all!