The Way/Theosis/entire sanctification.

[GodsGrace]

Correct--and confusion reigns.

Key Theologian: Augustine is considered one of the most important Church Fathers in the Latin West. His works, such as Confessions, The City of God, and On the Trinity, had a lasting impact on Western theology and philosophy. His views on sin and grace, especially articulated in his debates with the Pelagians, became foundational for Western Christian thought.
Reception in the Eastern Church:
Limited Influence: Augustine's influence was not as pronounced in the Eastern Orthodox Church. The theological traditions in the Greek-speaking East were shaped more by figures like the Cappadocian Fathers (Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa) and John Chrysostom. Eastern theology developed differently, focusing more on theosis (deification) and a different understanding of grace.

Criticism and Skepticism: Some Eastern theologians were skeptical of Augustine's teachings, particularly his views on original sin and predestination. While Augustine was not widely regarded as a heretic in the East, his ideas were not fully embraced, and some Eastern Orthodox theologians have criticized aspects of his theology.
J.

Augustine was a heretic.
What he taught about original sin had never before been heard of in the early church.
Here it is in a nutshell:
Original sin was always taught, but infants were baptized not only for the removal of the EFFECT of original sin but for other reasons.
Augustine taught, and the west accepted for varying reasons, that each person is IMPUTED the sin of Adam, making each person personally responsible for Adam's sin. Thus,,,no baptism...baby goes to hell.

Re Predestination....yes, we can thank Augustine for this doctrine...which came about due to his teaching on the complete depravity of man. A nice change from his early life when he indulged completely in depravity - even considering marrying a 10 year old girl. Happily, he converted before this.
He changed his mind on free will too.
And why not? He was a gnostic Manachean for 10 years prior to converting to Christianity.

 

[Johann]

Augustine was a heretic.
What he taught about original sin had never before been heard of in the early church.
Here it is in a nutshell:
Original sin was always taught, but infants were baptized not only for the removal of the EFFECT of original sin but for other reasons.
Augustine taught, and the west accepted for varying reasons, that each person is IMPUTED the sin of Adam, making each person personally responsible for Adam's sin. Thus,,,no baptism...baby goes to hell.

Re Predestination....yes, we can thank Augustine for this doctrine...which came about due to his teaching on the complete depravity of man. A nice change from his early life when he indulged completely in depravity - even considering marrying a 10 year old girl. Happily, he converted before this.
He changed his mind on free will too.
And why not? He was a gnostic Manachean for 10 years prior to converting to Christianity.

One problem--

The statement you provided contains some factual elements but also includes inaccuracies and a biased interpretation of Augustine's teachings.

1. Augustine as a Heretic:
Inaccuracy: Augustine is not considered a heretic by the mainstream Christian tradition. In fact, he is one of the most influential Church Fathers, especially in the Latin West. He is recognized as a saint in both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, though his influence in the East is less pronounced.

Clarification: While some of Augustine’s views, particularly on predestination and original sin, have been controversial, they have been widely accepted within Western Christianity. His theological positions were hotly debated but not deemed heretical by the mainstream Church.

2. Original Sin:
Historical Context: The concept of original sin existed before Augustine, but he was the one who developed it more fully, particularly in response to the Pelagian controversy. Augustine taught that all human beings inherit a sinful nature due to Adam’s sin, which affects their ability to choose good without divine grace.

Infant Baptism: Baptism for the remission of sins, including original sin, was practiced in the early Church, but Augustine emphasized that without baptism, the stain of original sin remains.

He argued that unbaptized infants who die cannot enter the Kingdom of God. However, the notion that infants go to hell if unbaptized is an oversimplification. Augustine did believe in the necessity of baptism, but his views on the fate of unbaptized infants evolved, and the Church later developed different views on this matter.

3. Imputed Sin and Personal Responsibility:
Misrepresentation: Augustine did not teach that individuals are personally responsible for Adam’s sin in a legalistic sense. Instead, he argued that human nature was corrupted by Adam’s sin, and this corrupted nature is inherited by all. His view is more about the transmission of a sinful nature than the imputation of Adam’s specific guilt to every individual.

Clarification: The idea of imputed guilt, where individuals are personally accountable for Adam’s specific sin, is not the precise teaching of Augustine. His focus was on the inherited consequences of original sin.

4. Predestination and Depravity:
Augustine's Doctrine: Augustine’s views on predestination were indeed influential, particularly his belief that God predestines some to salvation. This was connected to his views on the total depravity of man, which posits that without God's grace, humans cannot choose good. However, Augustine’s doctrine of predestination was not as deterministic as later interpretations, like those of Calvinism.

Life Context: Augustine’s early life was indeed marked by a struggle with sin and indulgence, including a long-term relationship outside of marriage, but the claim about him considering marrying a 10-year-old is not well-documented and seems to be an exaggeration.

5. Augustine’s Conversion and Manichaeanism:
Gnosticism and Manichaeism: Augustine was indeed influenced by Manichaeanism, a dualistic religion with Gnostic elements, before his conversion to Christianity. However, after converting, he rejected these beliefs and became a staunch critic of them.

Free Will: Augustine initially held to a more libertarian view of free will, but later in his life, particularly in response to Pelagianism, he emphasized the necessity of divine grace for any good action. He did not completely abandon the concept of free will but redefined it in the context of grace.

Hence--confusion continue to reign and I think we need to get back to Scriptures @GodsGrace

 

[Johann]

St. John of the Cross experienced a relationship with God that is very rare indeed.
I cannot remember the name of his experience, but it was so complete as for a person to be almost removed from this life.
Some other saints have experienced this, but very few.

St. John of the Cross (1542–1591) was a Spanish mystic, Carmelite friar, and major figure in the Counter-Reformation. His experiences and writings profoundly shaped Christian mysticism, especially through his works like "The Dark Night of the Soul" and "The Ascent of Mount Carmel."

St. John of the Cross’s Mystical Experience:
Dark Night of the Soul:

Spiritual Journey: St. John of the Cross described a profound and transformative spiritual journey marked by what he called the "Dark Night of the Soul." This experience represents a period of intense spiritual trial, where the soul feels abandoned by God and stripped of all comfort, both spiritual and worldly. This "night" is not just a time of suffering but a purgative process where the soul is purified and brought closer to God.
Union with God: Through this painful experience, the soul is prepared for a deeper, more intimate union with God, often described as mystical marriage. St. John of the Cross viewed this as a rare and extraordinary grace, one that few attain. The end of the "dark night" brings about a profound peace and a sense of divine presence that is ineffable and beyond ordinary human experience.
Mystical Theology:

Passive and Active Nights: St. John distinguished between the "active night," where the individual actively seeks to detach from worldly things, and the "passive night," where God takes the soul through purification. Both are essential for reaching the fullness of divine union.
Transforming Union: At the heart of St. John’s mysticism is the concept of transforming union, where the soul becomes so united with God that it shares in the divine life. This union is often described in terms of love, with God as the lover and the soul as the beloved, mirroring the language of the Song of Songs from the Bible.
Rare Experience:

Uniqueness: St. John of the Cross’s experiences are considered rare because they involve a depth of mystical union with God that few achieve. His writings suggest that such an experience is granted by God to those who are especially chosen and prepared through intense spiritual discipline and suffering.
Impact and Legacy:
Christian Mysticism: St. John’s teachings on the dark night and mystical union have had a lasting influence on Christian mysticism. His works are still studied today by those interested in deepening their spiritual life and understanding the more profound aspects of union with God.
Carmelite Reform: Along with St. Teresa of Ávila, St. John played a crucial role in reforming the Carmelite Order, emphasizing a return to the original spirit of contemplative prayer and asceticism.

Mysticism/mystic--back to the Scriptures @GodsGrace we are living in The Age of Enlightenment and a radical departure from what stands written since most are biblical illiterate.
Factual statement.
J.

 

[GodsGrace]

The problem is that after water baptism, the priest would lay hands on the person and pray for the Holy Spirit to fall on them that is to say, the baptism of the Holy Spirit and freedom from sin. So really it was both together and we know that water does not save, thanks to Peter.

There was one baptism in the early church.
Water baptism.
A convert went down into the water dead, and came out alive in Christ.
This meaneth, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit.
Barnabas 70-130AD

I don't care to change the topic at hand.
(unless you want to).

I believe that the EO church soon became rife with wrong teachings. But not his one that was unanimous - you either believed in Theosis or you thought that it was gradual.

As I stated....the Early Church realized very early on that living a sinless life was not possible.
The Early Church Fathers spoke to sin:

Christ alone is sinless. However, as far as we are able, let us try to sin as little as possible.
Clement of Alexandria 195AD

The Lord knew Himself to be the only guiltless One. and so He teaches us to beg "to have our debts remitted us".
Tertullian 198AD

John said IF not when.

IF means something is possible.
IF means we might do something or other.

John made provision IF we sin.
Jesus made provision IF we sin.

He instructed us to pray:
FORGIVE OUR DEBTS AS WE FORGIVE OUR DEBTORS.
Matthew 6:9

Jesus did not mean to those to whom we owe money,
but those who have sinned against us as we sin against God.

Sinning is possible and probable.

I don't see a contradiction please explain.

In the first paragraph you state that the suspension/eradication of sin does NOT have to wait till we die in order for us to be restored to the pre-fall state.
Meaning we could be sinless right now....
and be restored to the pre-fall state???
This is impossible BTW.

In the second paragraph you state that we never reach a state when we cannot sin if we wish.

It sounds contradictory to me.
In the first it sounds like sinless perfection.

In the second it sounds like we WILL sin at times.

 

[Johann]

In the first paragraph you state that the suspension/eradication of sin does NOT have to wait till we die in order for us to be restored to the pre-fall state.

Not to derail the thread--do you believe the sinful nature has been suspended or eradicated?

 

[GodsGrace]

One problem--

The statement you provided contains some factual elements but also includes inaccuracies and a biased interpretation of Augustine's teachings.

1. Augustine as a Heretic:
Inaccuracy: Augustine is not considered a heretic by the mainstream Christian tradition. In fact, he is one of the most influential Church Fathers, especially in the Latin West. He is recognized as a saint in both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, though his influence in the East is less pronounced.

Clarification: While some of Augustine’s views, particularly on predestination and original sin, have been controversial, they have been widely accepted within Western Christianity. His theological positions were hotly debated but not deemed heretical by the mainstream Church.

His views were accepted because he was very influential and served the church well for that time period.
His debate with Pelagius had a lot to do with his coming to a powerful position.
NO ONE else believed as he did.
Heretical means believing something that is not accepted by the mainstream.
Influential...yes.
That does not make him correct in his teachings.

As far as his teaching on infant baptism....
the CC no longer teaches that babies not baptized are going to hell.
This is an extreme position accepted only by Calvinists.

2. Original Sin:
Historical Context: The concept of original sin existed before Augustine, but he was the one who developed it more fully, particularly in response to the Pelagian controversy. Augustine taught that all human beings inherit a sinful nature due to Adam’s sin, which affects their ability to choose good without divine grace.

Original sin was not IMPUTED to us individually.
Scripture teaches that we are only responsible for our own sin,
and I think you know scripture enough to know that this is correct.

Infant Baptism: Baptism for the remission of sins, including original sin, was practiced in the early Church, but Augustine emphasized that without baptism, the stain of original sin remains.

He argued that unbaptized infants who die cannot enter the Kingdom of God. However, the notion that infants go to hell if unbaptized is an oversimplification.

Not an oversimplification.
This is what he taught.
Yes, baptism for infants was always practiced...
NOT for the reason HE taught.

Augustine did believe in the necessity of baptism, but his views on the fate of unbaptized infants evolved, and the Church later developed different views on this matter.

3. Imputed Sin and Personal Responsibility:
Misrepresentation: Augustine did not teach that individuals are personally responsible for Adam’s sin in a legalistic sense. Instead, he argued that human nature was corrupted by Adam’s sin, and this corrupted nature is inherited by all. His view is more about the transmission of a sinful nature than the imputation of Adam’s specific guilt to every individual.

This was always believed and did not require Augustine's adjustment.

Clarification: The idea of imputed guilt, where individuals are personally accountable for Adam’s specific sin, is not the precise teaching of Augustine. His focus was on the inherited consequences of original sin.

No. Incorrect.
Are you using chatgpt4?

4. Predestination and Depravity:
Augustine's Doctrine: Augustine’s views on predestination were indeed influential, particularly his belief that God predestines some to salvation. This was connected to his views on the total depravity of man, which posits that without God's grace, humans cannot choose good. However, Augustine’s doctrine of predestination was not as deterministic as later interpretations, like those of Calvinism.

This is incorrect.
The time element had a lot to do with his understanding of predestination.
Something about God seeing everything all at once.
I don't understand it very well and I don't use AI...so that's the best I can do.

And HOW do you think his understanding of predestination was not as fatalistic as Calvin's??
He didn't believe in double predestination...
WHAT'S THE DIFFERNECE?
If you need chatgpt to know this,,,,you don't know enough.

Life Context: Augustine’s early life was indeed marked by a struggle with sin and indulgence, including a long-term relationship outside of marriage, but the claim about him considering marrying a 10-year-old is not well-documented and seems to be an exaggeration.

Ask google instead of AI.

5. Augustine’s Conversion and Manichaeanism:
Gnosticism and Manichaeism: Augustine was indeed influenced by Manichaeanism, a dualistic religion with Gnostic elements, before his conversion to Christianity. However, after converting, he rejected these beliefs and became a staunch critic of them.

Then why did he bring them back into his philosophy in his later life?

Free Will: Augustine initially held to a more libertarian view of free will, but later in his life, particularly in response to Pelagianism, he emphasized the necessity of divine grace for any good action. He did not completely abandon the concept of free will but redefined it in the context of grace.

This is funny J.
He INVENTED determinism in the Christian church !
There was no such idea before him.

Hence--confusion continue to reign and I think we need to get back to Scriptures @GodsGrace

Yes.
Better to use the bible than ANY AI system to reply.
I'm rather disappointed to be honest.

 

[GodsGrace]

Not to derail the thread--do you believe the sinful nature has been suspended or eradicated?

Neither.

 

[GodsGrace]

St. John of the Cross (1542–1591) was a Spanish mystic, Carmelite friar, and major figure in the Counter-Reformation. His experiences and writings profoundly shaped Christian mysticism, especially through his works like "The Dark Night of the Soul" and "The Ascent of Mount Carmel."

St. John of the Cross’s Mystical Experience:
Dark Night of the Soul:

Spiritual Journey: St. John of the Cross described a profound and transformative spiritual journey marked by what he called the "Dark Night of the Soul." This experience represents a period of intense spiritual trial, where the soul feels abandoned by God and stripped of all comfort, both spiritual and worldly. This "night" is not just a time of suffering but a purgative process where the soul is purified and brought closer to God.
Union with God: Through this painful experience, the soul is prepared for a deeper, more intimate union with God, often described as mystical marriage. St. John of the Cross viewed this as a rare and extraordinary grace, one that few attain. The end of the "dark night" brings about a profound peace and a sense of divine presence that is ineffable and beyond ordinary human experience.
Mystical Theology:

Passive and Active Nights: St. John distinguished between the "active night," where the individual actively seeks to detach from worldly things, and the "passive night," where God takes the soul through purification. Both are essential for reaching the fullness of divine union.
Transforming Union: At the heart of St. John’s mysticism is the concept of transforming union, where the soul becomes so united with God that it shares in the divine life. This union is often described in terms of love, with God as the lover and the soul as the beloved, mirroring the language of the Song of Songs from the Bible.
Rare Experience:

Uniqueness: St. John of the Cross’s experiences are considered rare because they involve a depth of mystical union with God that few achieve. His writings suggest that such an experience is granted by God to those who are especially chosen and prepared through intense spiritual discipline and suffering.
Impact and Legacy:
Christian Mysticism: St. John’s teachings on the dark night and mystical union have had a lasting influence on Christian mysticism. His works are still studied today by those interested in deepening their spiritual life and understanding the more profound aspects of union with God.
Carmelite Reform: Along with St. Teresa of Ávila, St. John played a crucial role in reforming the Carmelite Order, emphasizing a return to the original spirit of contemplative prayer and asceticism.

Mysticism/mystic--back to the Scriptures @GodsGrace we are living in The Age of Enlightenment and a radical departure from what stands written since most are biblical illiterate.
Factual statement.
J.

I'm going to be having difficulty posting to you.
I like to post to persons that speak from their own knowledge.
I even dislike copy and paste.

I take time with my responses and like to have a real conversation.
I don't enjoy speaking to programs.

Now, if you're going to tell me you have some handicap and cannot do better....
then I'm afraid I'll not be able to respect your posts.
And, I believe I've had this conversation with you before.
That's all I'll say.

 

[Johann]

This is incorrect.
The time element had a lot to do with his understanding of predestination.
Something about God seeing everything all at once.
I don't understand it very well and I don't use AI...so that's the best I can do.

And HOW do you think his understanding of predestination was not as fatalistic as Calvin's??
He didn't believe in double predestination...
WHAT'S THE DIFFERNECE?
If you need chatgpt to know this,,,,you don't know enough.

Unfortunately for you--I use a lot of sources and what I use on my Word on my computer.
Augustine's Understanding of Predestination:
Single Predestination:

God’s Foreknowledge and Eternity: Augustine taught that God, in His omniscience and timeless nature, foreknows all events and choices, including who will be saved. His view of predestination was closely tied to the idea that God exists outside of time and sees all of history simultaneously ("all at once"). For Augustine, God’s predestination is based on His foreknowledge of who will freely respond to His grace, but it does not negate human free will.
Electing Grace: Augustine believed that God’s grace is necessary for salvation and that this grace is given to the elect—those whom God has predestined to be saved. However, he did not articulate a system where God predestines some to damnation (known as double predestination).
Rejection of Double Predestination:

Calvin vs. Augustine: Calvin, influenced by Augustine, took the doctrine further by developing the concept of double predestination, where God predestines some people to salvation and others to damnation. Augustine did not explicitly teach this; rather, he focused on the positive aspect of predestination—God choosing certain people for salvation.
Human Responsibility: Augustine maintained that humans have a role in their salvation through the response to God’s grace, though he emphasized that even this response is made possible by grace. This contrasts with Calvin’s more deterministic view, where the outcome is entirely dependent on God’s sovereign choice.
Time Element in Augustine’s Thought:
God’s Eternal Present: Augustine’s view of God seeing everything "all at once" relates to his conception of God’s eternity. Augustine believed that God’s knowledge is not bound by time; He sees past, present, and future in a single, eternal "now." This understanding of time plays into Augustine’s conception of predestination, as God’s knowledge of who will be saved is not something that unfolds over time but is eternally present to Him.
Summary of the Differences:
Augustine: Believed in predestination based on God’s foreknowledge and grace but did not advocate for a deterministic system where individuals have no role in their salvation. He rejected the idea of double predestination, emphasizing God's grace as the means by which the elect are saved.
Calvin: Developed the idea of double predestination, where God predestines some to eternal life and others to eternal damnation, with a more deterministic view of human free will and salvation.

Source:
"The Confessions" and "The City of God" by Augustine: These primary texts from Augustine provide insight into his views on God's foreknowledge, grace, and predestination. His discussions on time and eternity, particularly in The Confessions (Book XI), highlight his view of God's eternal present.

"Augustine: A Guide for the Perplexed" by James Wetzel: This book provides an accessible explanation of Augustine’s complex views, including his thoughts on predestination, grace, and human free will, showing how his ideas developed in response to Pelagianism.

"The Cambridge Companion to Augustine" (edited by Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann): This scholarly collection includes essays that discuss Augustine's theology in depth, particularly his views on predestination and their influence on later Christian thought.

"Predestination: The American Career of a Contentious Doctrine" by Peter J. Thuesen: This book traces the historical development of the doctrine of predestination, including the distinctions between Augustine’s and Calvin’s views.

"The Westminster Handbook to Augustine" by John C. Cavadini: This reference work provides a detailed overview of Augustine's theology, including his approach to predestination, and contrasts it with later developments in Reformed theology.

Then why did he bring them back into his philosophy in his later life?

The claim that Augustine brought back elements of Manichaeanism into his philosophy later in life is a common misconception.

This is funny J.
He INVENTED determinism in the Christian church !
There was no such idea before him.

Clarifying Augustine’s Influence:
Not Absolute Determinism: It’s important to note that Augustine did not advocate for absolute determinism as later Calvinists would. Augustine maintained that human free will exists, but after the Fall, it is so impaired that it can only choose good through divine grace. This is why Augustine's theology is often seen as a middle ground between Pelagianism (which overly emphasizes free will) and later Reformed determinism (which emphasizes predestination and the sovereignty of God almost exclusively).

Historical Context: Before Augustine, the early Church Fathers generally affirmed free will, though their views were not fully systematized in the way Augustine’s were. His contributions were pivotal in shaping Western Christianity’s understanding of the interplay between divine grace and human freedom.

Summary:
Augustine did not "invent" determinism, but his theological developments, particularly concerning grace and predestination, introduced a more complex understanding of free will that leaned toward what could be called a "soft determinism." He argued that human will is not free in the libertarian sense after the Fall, but rather it is bound by sin and only liberated by God’s grace. This nuanced position significantly influenced later Christian thought, including the development of Calvinist determinism.

Sources for Further Reading:

"Augustine and the Limits of Virtue" by James Wetzel

"The Cambridge Companion to Augustine" edited by Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann

"Augustine of Hippo: A Biography" by Peter Brown

Yes.
Better to use the bible than ANY AI system to reply.
I'm rather disappointed to be honest.

So sorry for the disappointment--the source/es has been provided and last time I've checked, ChatGpt can make mistakes and we wouldn't want that, no do we?
J.

 

[Hepzibah]

@GodsGrace "In the second paragraph you state that we never reach a state when we cannot sin if we wish."

Meaning, we will always be able to sin if we so wish. Some say we cannot sin again if we are sinless. We can but will not remain in that state and need restoring.

 

[Johann]

I'm going to be having difficulty posting to you.
I like to post to persons that speak from their own knowledge.
I even dislike copy and paste.

I take time with my responses and like to have a real conversation.
I don't enjoy speaking to programs.

Excellent, do you have a YouTube account since I prefer a pros to pros dialogue myself in real time, real life.

 

[Johann]

@Gods Grace "In the second paragraph you state that we never reach a state when we cannot sin if we wish."

Meaning, we will always be able to sin if we so wish. Some say we cannot sin again if we are sinless. We can but will not remain in that state and need restoring.

Do you have Scripture references for this statement?
3 references would suffice since you are from the Eastern Orthodoxy/Theology.
J.

 

[Hepzibah]

Do you have Scripture references for this statement?
3 references would suffice since you are from the Eastern Orthodoxy/Theology.
J.

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. Gal 2:11

 

[Johann]

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. Gal 2:11

Would you like to exegete this verse?

Personally I feel we are in two ditches, Western Orthodox and East.

 

[Johann]

I'm going to be having difficulty posting to you.
I like to post to persons that speak from their own knowledge.
I even dislike copy and paste.

I take time with my responses and like to have a real conversation.
I don't enjoy speaking to programs.

Now, if you're going to tell me you have some handicap and cannot do better....
then I'm afraid I'll not be able to respect your posts.
And, I believe I've had this conversation with you before.
That's all I'll say.

The more I post answers based on questions I get, the more I realize I need to check my Bible and fact-check my sources first. This way, I can learn and grow through the process. Just like @Hepzibah, who provides sources and engages in meaningful dialogue, we should be prepared for debates by exercising our critical thinking daily. By regularly reading and memorizing scriptures, we can have intelligent and informed discussions.
But since you think you have a conversation with a "program" I can't be of further assistance.
Prove my posts wrong but don't attack me sister-I have been in many, many debates before I even joined online forums.
Shalom
J.

 

[Hepzibah]

Would you like to exegete this verse?

Personally I feel we are in two ditches, Western Orthodox and East.

No I wouldn't like to. I posted a piece I had written on Phil. 3 but you made no comment. You keep posting texts on gradual sanctification when I have said I believe there is a process. It seems to me that nothing useful can be gained by a joint discussion with you. As others are having problems with you, perhaps you should give it some thought. And I am not Eastern Orthodox.

 

[Johann]

No I wouldn't like to. I posted a piece I had written on Phil. 3 but you made no comment. You keep posting texts on gradual sanctification when I have said I believe there is a process. It seems to me that nothing useful can be gained by a joint discussion with you. As others are having problems with you, perhaps you should give it some thought. And I am not Eastern Orthodox.

Mm--so I've noticed, not Eastern Orthodox.
Personally I don't give a hoot what others are saying or those who have "problems" with me.
Nice meeting with you.
Adieu
Johann.
P.S. you have an ignore button.

 

[amigo de christo]

Augustine was a heretic.
What he taught about original sin had never before been heard of in the early church.
Here it is in a nutshell:
Original sin was always taught, but infants were baptized not only for the removal of the EFFECT of original sin but for other reasons.
Augustine taught, and the west accepted for varying reasons, that each person is IMPUTED the sin of Adam, making each person personally responsible for Adam's sin. Thus,,,no baptism...baby goes to hell.

Re Predestination....yes, we can thank Augustine for this doctrine...which came about due to his teaching on the complete depravity of man. A nice change from his early life when he indulged completely in depravity - even considering marrying a 10 year old girl. Happily, he converted before this.
He changed his mind on free will too.
And why not? He was a gnostic Manachean for 10 years prior to converting to Christianity.

that be the problem with many . have you ever heard you can take some people out of the harlot
but you just cant seem to take the harlot out of them .
And the problem is christendom often accepts the pagan with the holy . it become blended .
One thing , i think augustine had right , even though he erred with part of it was
this .
He said the RCC was the WHORE , but then made the dire mistake of saying we cant just come out . oh her . big mistake on that latter part .
I think it was augustine that said the catholic church in large had become the harlot . WELL HE WAS RIGHT about that part .
because man it is , but allow me to say the part he didnt say , COME YE OUT from amongst her .
He who sits under a harlot , he gonna pick up a disease for sure and for certain
and i dont just speak of the physcial either . the spiritual is far deadlier .

 

[amigo de christo]

Mm--so I've noticed, not Eastern Orthodox.
Personally I don't give a hoot what others are saying or those who have "problems" with me.
Nice meeting with you.
Adieu
Johann.
P.S. you have an ignore button.

It dont matter what folks might say about ya my friend , you know i loves ya . Now to the trenches
and stay WELL dug in that bible .

 

[GodsGrace]

that be the problem with many . have you ever heard you can take some people out of the harlot
but you just cant seem to take the harlot out of them .
And the problem is christendom often accepts the pagan with the holy . it become blended .
One thing , i think augustine had right , even though he erred with part of it was
this .
He said the RCC was the WHORE , but then made the dire mistake of saying we cant just come out . oh her . big mistake on that latter part .
I think it was augustine that said the catholic church in large had become the harlot . WELL HE WAS RIGHT about that part .
because man it is , but allow me to say the part he didnt say , COME YE OUT from amongst her .
He who sits under a harlot , he gonna pick up a disease for sure and for certain
and i dont just speak of the physcial either . the spiritual is far deadlier .

I'm not sure why you're posting the above Amigo.
I just don't understand to what you're replying.
confused