Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The Augustinian idea that God's irresistible grace extend... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The Augustinian idea that God's irresistible grace extends to a limited elect only is mistaken.

    Afterlife & DeathEternal Conscious Torment
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Scotus's doctrine of divine freedom entails God could extend saving grace universally without logical contradiction or diminishment of divine sovereignty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If grace is irresistible by nature, its restriction to an elect implies God actively withholds it from others, making God the direct cause of damnation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A God who is the direct cause of any creature's damnation is incompatible with the Anselmian conception of God as that than which nothing greater can be conceived.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Origen's apokatastasis tradition, affirmed in modified form by Gregory of Nyssa, holds that divine goodness necessarily tends toward the restoration of all rational creatures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Paul's claim in Romans 11:32 that God binds all over to disobedience aims at mercy on all, then limiting grace to an elect renders the universal scope of divine binding gratuitous and punitive rather than redemptive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all (St. Paul, Rom. 11:32).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Divine judgment is itself an expression of divine mercy and therefore part of what makes God's grace irresistible for everyone in the end.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Afterlife & DeathEternal Conscious Torment

    Related

    A God who is the direct cause of any creature's damnation is incompatible with t...Divine judgment is itself an expression of divine mercy and therefore part of wh...God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them al...If Paul's claim in Romans 11:32 that God binds all over to disobedience aims at ...
    +3 moreShow less
    If grace is irresistible by nature, its restriction to an elect implies God acti...Origen's apokatastasis tradition, affirmed in modified form by Gregory of Nyssa,...Scotus's doctrine of divine freedom entails God could extend saving grace univer...

    Similar

    The grace God confers upon a limited elect is utterly gratuitous and s...85%God's grace is irresistible in the end and will eventually reconcile a...72%Without such a specified sense, the argument for limited election base...70%St. Paul clearly teaches that salvation is wholly a matter of grace.69%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: heaven-hell
    View source passageHide passage
    If this set of propositions is logically inconsistent, as it surely is, then at least one proposition in the set is false. In no way does it follow, of course, that only one proposition in the set is false, and neither does it follow that at least two of them are true. But if someone does accept any two of these propositions, as virtually every mainline Christian theologian does, then such a person has no choice but to reject the third.[1] It is typically rather easy, moreover, to determine which proposition a given theologian ultimately rejects, and we can therefore classify theologians acc...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit