tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19005814.post115612637059109446..comments2023-10-26T01:37:49.599-07:00Comments on The Evantine Abbey: Sin: Excuse or EscapeEvan B. Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08070442133774056436noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19005814.post-1156629721434070832006-08-26T15:02:00.000-07:002006-08-26T15:02:00.000-07:00Firstly: "The positions of determinism and free wi...Firstly: "The positions of determinism and free will each carry that virus." - Amen<BR/><BR/>Regarding the theological territory covered I have another thought.<BR/>Let us see what the Oracle shall make of the following idea. <BR/>The problem of faith as a work v. faith as a gift comes in a subtle problem in the definitions. <B>Common Argument:</B> <I>We know that the natural man cannot please God. We know that salvific faith pleases God. Ergo, the salvific faith was inserted by God to change the natural man.</I><BR/>Sounds good and rational. The problem is in the nature of the definitions as they interact with the machinery of logic. The point of contention occurs at the point of salvific faith, at this infintesimal point, what is the man? He is natural prior to this, and he is sanctified after. But <I>at this exact point</I> is not well defined. And we were relying on this for the above theorem. Too many of the proofs are of this sort, indeed most (if not all) of the determinism proofs regarding salvation are of this sort. And I would posit that the free will position is equally problematical in some of the definitions that it posits and applies to ill defined points.<BR/><BR/>So Bish: Thoughts, comments, snide remarks?Nuallainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10284752933284385360noreply@blogger.com