You're being taken to the woodshed! 

Your crime? 

Playing a theological shell game with members of NB in order to promote the RCC!

I quote from the following post [0]:  "Theologians of the Catholic Church universally embrace the idea of free will, but generally do not view free will as existing apart, from or in contradiction to grace. St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas wrote extensively on free will, with Augustine focusing on the importance of free will in his responses to the Manichaeans, and also on the limitations of a concept of unlimited free will as denial of grace, in his refutations of Pelagius. Catholic Christianity's emphasis on free will and grace is often contrasted with predestination in Reformed Protestant Christianity, especially after the Counter-Reformation, but in understanding differing conceptions of free will it is just as important to understand the differing conceptions of the nature of God, focusing on the idea that God can be all-powerful and all-knowing even while people continue to exercise free will, because God does not exist in time (see the link to Catholic Encyclopedia below for more)."

Looks good enough.  So why would Tracheostomy have a problem with this?

1.  I assert the exact opposite; that Reformed theologians are far more Augustinian than the RCC with regards to free will, and that it is the Catholics who are more Pelagian than any other denomination.     

2.  I assert that Futbol's copy-paste is worded to make you assume that Augustine is on the side of the RCC with regards to grace and free will, when there is no real proof to back it.

3. I further assert that Futbol (or any other Roman Catholic for that matter) is unable to even clarify the substantive connections between every sentence in the above quote, from period to capitalization.

Augustine ---> Modern Catholic Theologians (what's the relation again?) 

RCC on Free Will ---> Reformed view of predestination (where's the contrast again?)

RCC view on nature of God ---> Reformed view (where is the conflict again?)

4. I'm gambling that Futbol does not have the courage to actually admit #1 and #2.

5. Nor do I believe that Futbol is actually able to define the doctrine of free will without compromising Augustine and sounding more like Pelagius.

6. I assert that I can back my stance in one link, with pertinent quotes, in less than 30 minutes of reading time, with the backing of holy scripture, and all without an endless back and forth.  I can nail it all shut in one move and settle it for good.  

Can Futbol say the same? 

Doubt it.

-PJ  

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07