Predestination vs. Free Will- Are we chosen by God, or do we choose God?

Theology
62

Soul, you asked a sharp question—“What is your understanding of grace?” So let’s break it open and let the Word speak.

Grace is not God offering help to the morally inclined. Grace is not a nudge. Grace is resurrection. It’s the sovereign, undeserved, and unstoppable favor of God that takes rebels, haters of God, spiritual corpses—and makes them sons (Eph. 2:4–5, Rom. 5:10). You said He doesn’t draw anyone against their free will. Agreed. But here’s the real mic drop: He changes their will.

Before God draws a soul, that soul doesn’t want Him. Doesn’t seek Him. Doesn’t love Him. Romans 3:11—“no one seeks God.” Not one. Our will is enslaved to sin (John 8:34), dead in trespasses (Eph. 2:1), and hostile to God (Rom. 8:7). So when the Father draws someone to the Son, He’s not dragging a willing saint. He’s awakening a dead sinner.

That drawing isn’t coercion. It’s conversion. It’s not God violating their will. It’s God renewing their will. Ezekiel 36:26—“I will remove the heart of stone… and give you a heart of flesh.” Once that happens, the sinner wants Christ. Grace doesn’t crush the will. It liberates it.

So no, God doesn’t violate free will—He sets it free.

—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.

63

The wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23), so since sin leads to death, and Grace leads to life, how could Grace work in those who willfully commit sin and refuse to repent of it?

But you said that God doesn’t draw anyone against their free will. So, if the soul’s will is to not want God: doesn’t want to seek or love Him, then why would He draw that soul to those things against their will?

64

Grace, by definition, reigns through righteousness unto eternal life (Rom. 5:21), not through rebellion. If the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23), then willful sin, deliberate, unrepented defiance, cuts one off from the life Grace imparts. Grace is not a license to sin (Rom. 6:1-2); it is the power to overcome it. Those who trample the Son of God underfoot and insult the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29) do not possess grace, they resist it. Grace saves the broken, not the defiant.

God does not override the will, but He awakens it. He draws by conviction, not coercion (John 6:44), opening hearts (Acts 16:14) and granting repentance (2 Tim. 2:25), yet never forcing love. If a soul resists, He allows it (Rom. 1:24). Drawing is persuasive, not invasive.

J.

65

Welcome back @Johann, its interesting concept, i have talked about this on another post at

I see what ur saying. Interesting.
Peace
Sam

66

Soul, you’re zeroing in on the paradox—but the only reason it looks like a contradiction is because you’re still assuming grace works with the will instead of on the will.

You asked, “Why would God draw a soul to things it doesn’t want, if that’s against their will?” The answer: because grace changes what the soul wants. The will doesn’t remain frozen in rebellion once grace invades. That’s the miracle. God doesn’t force people to come to Christ against their will—He changes their will so that they want Christ. That’s not coercion. That’s regeneration.

Titus 3:3-5 lays it bare—we were “foolish, disobedient, led astray… hating one another,” but “when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, He saved us… by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” Not by our decision. Not by our moral upgrade. By His mercy.

You quoted Romans 6:23: “The wages of sin is death.” Exactly. So how does grace work in someone spiritually dead? It resurrects them. It’s not about sinners deciding to repent. It’s about the Spirit giving life to the dead (John 5:21). Dead souls don’t initiate repentance. God grants it (2 Tim. 2:25).

You think the sinner’s will is the starting point. Scripture says it’s the problem. Grace doesn’t wait for permission. It doesn’t beg for entry. It kicks the door off the hinges and gives a new heart.

The reason anyone repents is because grace got there first.

—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.

1 Like
67

You’re right, @Soul, but he re-shapes our “free will” to be more conformed to his will:

Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.
Rom 8:27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
Rom 8:28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.
Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

68

You said “Before God draws a soul, that soul doesn’t want Him. Doesn’t seek Him. Doesn’t love Him.” So, to say that God makes that soul want Him is 100% coercion against their will of not wanting Him, and thus contradicts your following statement: "God doesn’t draw anyone against their free will. Additionally, if God coerces us to want Him and be in Heaven, then what reason is there for anyone being in Hell for eternity (and He has made it clear that there will be)? He could just “change everyone’s will” who doesn’t want Him (go against their free will) to want Him and be in Heaven, and no one would be in Hell.

69

In another thread you said the following:

Here are just a few problems with the belief that Grace changes a person’s will. You said, “Before God draws a soul, that soul doesn’t want Him. Doesn’t seek Him. Doesn’t love Him"; “He [God] changes their will so that they want Christ.”

(I) If a soul doesn’t want God then that is their will, and to say that God makes such a soul want Him is to force that soul to want Him against their will, which contradicts your following statement: “God doesn’t draw anyone against their free will”.

(II) If God makes those who don’t want Him to want Him, then no one would be in Hell, and that contradicts the scriptural verses that make it clear there will be humans in Hell.

(III) There would be no merit if one is forced to do something.

70

God initiates, man respond.

Here’s a question ? In Ephesians 1:11 From what place are man chosen from.

Another words are people chosen to be in Christ.
Are chosen from being in Christ.

71

This beggs the question of what it means to be in Christ.

It’s like this similar story of a test where men are chosen from how they respond in a certain condition of going to war. The men after harsh, long fighting are chosen by those whom when they come to a pond of water drink out of their hands swooping the water up like a dog, Hence showing they are ready to go in for the next conquest.

Those that didn’t make themselves ready in that likeness were not chosen.

Many are called but few chosen. In this sense one can be in the light but not walk in it. Live in accords with the truth.

So yes God initiates and man responds. He is not coerced, for that would not make him have the ability to choose.

I believe it also come back to faith; What you do in your power vs. what one does in God’s power when God is with them and they know He is doing the work.

Another words if we are in the light we should walk as children of the light. For if we walk in the spirit we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all unrighteousness.

72

My thought is we know what we have when and only when we walk in it.

So then, faith is walking in what we say we believe.

Did you ever wonder why we cannot please God without faith?

My guess is…as from faith to faith…

From power to power…When we act in God..we are caught up in His power.

Another words we activate our power into His power.

And what could power be but exertion of energy.

Could this be the meaning of worshipping in Spirit and truth, when and only when we walk by faith. Seeing the righteous will live by his faithfullness. For his Spirit is forever.

Note to self: Wow! Is this faith His Spirit.
I asked that to me because. When Jesus was sleep on the boat and the disciples awake the storm came.. Jesus said to them, ye of little faith…at that time they had faith in Jesus but not the Faith of Jesus. Woeeeeeeee
Just some thoughts…I have to reread them myself…and see if Faith is power or Spirit.

73

Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth!” And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Loose him, and let him go.” John 11:43-44

There may be a teaching here that speaks to this question, and that is when Jesus raised a dead man back to life. You may ask yourself, when Jesus said “Lazarus, come forth!”, was he making this command in accordance with the will of Lazarus, or against it? You might say It was against the will of Lazarus because, being dead, he could not will himself to obey Jesus. Jesus made the command without regard to the will of the dead man. You might say it was in accord with his will, because who would not want to be alive. Jesus knowing the will of Lazarus, made the command that Lazarus would have wanted. But you might say although Lazarus could not obey unless Jesus made it possible, he did obey because life is better than death.

When Jesus said to me “KP, come forth” I obeyed, not because I was able before he enabled me, but once enabled I immediately “chose” life. Who wouldn’t?

Choose Life, who wouldn’t?
KP

74

To be “in Christ” is to participate in the communion of Christ’s divine-human life. Orthodox theology, rooted in patristic tradition understands this as the process of theosis, where humans by grace partake in the divine nature without losing their created distinction. St. Athanasius stated “Go became man so that man might become god”. This is not pantheism but a transformative union, where the believer, through the energy of God, is conformed to Christ’s likeness.
So lets talk abt synergy. Orthodoxy emphasizes the cooperative relationship between divine grace and human freedom. God initiates salvation through His love for humanity but humans respond through faith and obedience. This contrast monergistic views that I strongly deny and am against it like Calvinist predestination, which deny human cooperation. St.John Chrysostom in his homily on the Ephesians explains that God’s purpose includes human response as “God does not act coercively but invites freely”.
The analogy u gave that abt the soldiers, u are on the Orthodox track. Orthodox says, as u gave an example that matches with what Orthodox teaches, that divine election is not coercive. Humans are called to respond to God’s grace with faith and practice. Eph 2:8-10 reinforces this:
Salvation is by grace through faith, but faith manifests in works prepared by God.
The question of whether people are chosen to be in Christ or from being in Christ is clarified in Orthodox theology.
First, we need to distinguish between God’s eternal foreknowledge and temporal human response.
Eph 1:4 states that “He chose us in him before the foundation of the world”. This indicates that election is eternally rooted in Christ, the author and end of salvation. The “place” of election is the eternal Logos, in whom all things cohere.
Foreknowledge:
Orthodoxy, following St.John of Damascus and of course based on the Scriptures it evident that it holds that God’s foreknowledge does not negate free will. God foreknows who will respond to His call, but He doesn’t predetermine their choices. Thus, believers are chosen in Christ as those who, by grace, freely unite with Him through faith and the sacraments.
Baptismal Incorporation:
In Orthodox theology, being “in Christ” is sacramentally relaized through baptism, which unites believers to Christ’s death and resurrection (Rom 6:3-4). The chrismation further empowers the believer to live in the light of Christ.
The reference to Matt 22:14 aligns with the Orthodoxy, and not any other view like calvinist, arminian, or pelagians, they are not correct.
See in Matt 22:14, we see “Many are called, but few are chosen”
Orthodox distinction between universal call to salvation and the particular response of the elect is imp. It can only be explained by synergeia, any other monergistic view, or any involvement of monergistic idea collapses.
God’s call is universal as He desires all to be saved (1 Tim 2:4). However, election pertains to those who respond with repentance and faith, actively participating in the fellowship of Christ’s body, the Church.
As @Corlove13 said, walking in the light represents the Orthodox call to live in accordance with the truth. This involves spiritual discipline, prayer, and participation in the Eucharist, which cleanses from unrighteousness through Christ’s blood. St.Gregory Palamas emphasises that the uncreated energies of God enable believers to walk in the Spirit, actualising their election.
There is not a single hint of monergism in the Scripture or the early Church.
Orthodoxy rejects any notion of coercion in election. St. Maximus the Confessor teaches that human free will cooperates with divine grace, ensuring that salvation is a mutual act of love, not some unilateral imposition.

75

What does Calvinism say on this matter?
TULIP framework
Calvinism’s Total depravity posits that the Fall renders humanity utterly incapable of responding to God without prior regeneration as the will is enslaved to sin, devoid of any capacity for good. Orthodoxy acknowledges that Fall’s catastrophic effects including death and passions, but insists that the imago Dei remains intact, preserving free-will. St.Irenaeus teaches that humanity, though wounded, retains the capacity to cooperate with divine grace as the representation enables faith and repentance. Eph 2:8-10 presumes a human response, not a coerced regeneration. St.Gregory of Nyssa further clarifies that the Fall distorts but does not annihilate human freedom, allowing synergy with God’s energies.
Calvinism’s Total Depravity evacutes the imago Dei of its ontological significane, reducing humans to passive vessels of divine will, is a big theological blunder from Calvin. This undermines the love of humanity of God, who created humans for communion, not determinism.
THe Primacy of Autexousion
Orthodox theology, grounded in the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils, affirms the inalienable freedom of the human will. St.Gregory of Nyssa in his On the Making of Man, argues that humanity created according to the image, possesses an intrinsic capacity for self-determination, which is essential to the process of theosis. This freedom is not an autonomous rebellion against God, but a synergistic cooperation with divine grace.The Orthodox view holds that God’s foreknowledge of human actions doesnt negate human responsibility as divine omniscience operates outside the constraints of temporal causality.
In contrast, Calvinism’s denial of free will reduces humanity to a mere automaton, stripping away the dignity of the divine image. The Orthodox Critique, as articulated by St.Maximus the Confessor in his Disputation with Pyrrhus emphasises that human freedom is a reflection of the divine will’s freedom. Maximus distinguishes between the natural will which seeks the good, and the gnomic will, which deliberates in the context of sin.
Calvinism’s monergistic view contradicts the Chalcedonian affirmation of Christ’s two wills (dyothelitism,) which presupposes human freedom as integral to salvation. I think Calvin forgot abt it. (I dont accept even a single bit of monergism, monerigsm followed by synergism is also wrong, because:
If Christ has two wills, and one is human, then real human freedom is necessary for salvation. Monergism undercuts this
This is the primary reason, why monergism doesnt work in the first place.)
Double Predestination
Calvinist double predestination posits that God’s eternal decree determines both salvation and damnation, independent of human response. This view is logically incoherent. If God predestines some to damnation without regard for their actions, then doesn’t divine justice become arbitrary, and God’s love, which St.John the Theologian declares as God’s essence in 1 John 4:8, is rendered selective and exclusionary. What was Calvin thinking about? i have no idea. St.Irenaeus of Lyons in Against Heresies refutes such heresies like Calvin puts forward, i.e. determinism, arguing that God’s economy invites all to salvation through free participation in Christ’s recapitulation.
The Calvinist notion of limited atonement, that Christ’s sacrifice is efficacious only from the elect, further exacerbates this incoherence. Why are people even accepting this? The Orthodox Liturgy affirms that Christ’s death is “for the life of the world”. The universal scope of atonement, coupled with human freedom to accept or reject it, preserves the integrity of divine love and human responsibility.
Irresistible Grace
Calvinism’s doctrine of irresistible grace asserts that God’s grace unilaterally compels the elect to salvation, overriding human will. This one part, Irresistible Grace, is why I never get along with Calvinism. This negates the Orthodox principle of synergeia where divine grace and human freedom cooperate. St.John Chrysostom, in his Homilies on Romans, interprets Romans 8:28-30 as indicating that God’s calling is universal, but human response determines its efficacy. Grace, in Orthodoxy theology, is not a coercive force but an enabling presence, as seen in the parable of the Prodigal Son, where the father’s love awaits the son’s free return.
The parable of Prodigal Son itself destroys Calvinism’s Irresistible grace, still many Calvinist say that their views are aligned with scriptures.
The Calvinist view also fails to account for the eschatological dimension of salvation. In Orthodoxy, salvation is NOT A STATIC DECREE BUT A DYNAMIC PROCESS OF THEOSIS, where humans grow in likeness to God through participation in the divine energies. St. Athanasius’s maxim “God became man so that man might become god” encapsulates this transformative synergy which Calvinism’s monergism cannot accommodate.
The main problem
Calvinism says its respects the mysteries but it doesnt. If u look into Orthodox, it respects the mysteries like St.Gregory Palamas in his Triads, defends the distinction between God’s essence and energies, allowing human participation in divine life, without compromising divine transcendence.
Calvinism’s failure to distinguish between divine foreknowledge and causation collapses the apophatic mystery of God, reducing divine-human interaction to a deterministic framework.

76

Hi, while I am not a Catholic, I of course agree with you where you agree with what I believe :blush: . Lol

It’s when you believe the bread turns into the real body, and wine or grape juice turns into real blood.

I am not saying God’s presence can’t be there, but that I believe it’s symbolic.

We have to live a life resembling Jesus, day by day living out His word. This is the transforming power of eating Spiritual food that changes us to have his type of character. I believe it does teach to look at the heart and not judge outwardly.

One is to do it to remember what He has done and I read it was more like having a real meal rather than a piece of tiny bread and tiny glass of grape juice.

It’s a place where if we are actively caught up in His life that He should be in our presence…Because some can drink from the cup unworthily.

And you have to ask can 2 walk together unless they agree. But if we daily are walking in the word which can be said to be full of spirit and life because God is with us. How is it one can dine together with opposing wills?

Hence, what does it mean to drink unworthily?

77

This leads me to think of salvation in a sense of loyalty.

Why not loyalty until the end..of our lives here on earth sense our King now and forever more is Jesus.

So we are to practice living in the kingdom now as one that has already attained. Beautiful words. Can’t be mine - I must remember those myself. For, the kingdom is not eating nor drinking but righteousness, peace and joy in the holy ghost.

Scripture does say something like, pursue peace with all man, if possible, for without it you cannot see the kingdom.

Which means we must become like what is in the kingdom to see the kingdom.

God is so good.

So let’s try to see if this can be fused with election..
How can one be chosen in Him from the foundation of the world.

Could it be a statement of fact that anyone that would be in Christ now are chosen to comform to the image of Christ, because Christ was from the foundation. Like jumping into the call of duty, falling in the line up for service. Not because you were called but because you were called in Christ, under his leadership for service.

Here is something that just came to me too?
Whose breath of life is in us?

Whose Spirit is in us that is activated by our will..?
Which takes me back to the possible meaning of worshipping God in Spirit and truth. Rather it be the right attitude or His own Spirit that when we die will go back to Him having accomplished what it was set out for because His word became life to a body that was dead, we are actually serving Him with His own Spirit/word. There one sees “I am that I am”

So that leads to the will..But let me finish up this thought and how it may align with how God forknew.

So I would postulate that He foreknew because He is the power. Like the woman that touched the Hem of Christ Garment. Power is not based in rather the sun goes up or goes down. God is not subject to time but maybe His own energy.

I dont know where all this came from..but its deep.

78

Very interesting
Orthodoxy rejects a purely symbolic view of the Eucharist, affirming that the bread and wine become the true body and blood of Christ through the invocation of the Holy Spirit. St. John of Damascus teaches that the elements are transformed into Christ’s body and blood, not symbolically but ontoloigcally through divine energies. John 6:53-56 underscores this: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you”. The Eucharist is the medicine of immortality as St.Ignatius of Antioch describes, effecting theosis.
Partaking Worthily
U raise the question of partaking unworthily, asking how two can walk together unless they agree. Ok, Orthodox teaches that partaking worthily needs repentance and alignment with God’s will. St. Paul warns that partaking unworthil brings judgement, as it fails to discern the body of Christ. St. John Chrysostom explains that partaking unworthily occurs when one approaches without repentance or faith, living in oppostion to Christ’s character. The Eucharist demands cooperation, where the believer’s free will aligns with divine grace.
Partaking unworthily results from a failure to live in communion with Christ’s will. Daily walking in the word, which is Spirit and life prepares one for the Eucharist. So ur going good here.
Eucharisitic meal
@Corlove13, when u say Eucharist was originally a full meal, not some tiny bread or tiny glass of grape juice..yes ur right that Early Christian love feasts indeed accompanied the Eucharist, reflecting communion among believers. However, its important to put this point forward: that Orthodoxy maintains the meal’s essence lies in its transformation into Christ’s body and blood. St. Justin Martyr describes Eucharist as no ordinary food but the incarnate Logos received through thanksgiving. The Anaphora of divine liturgy invokes the Spirit to make the gifts holy, uniting in Christ’s body.
Nothing is impossible for God, if a rock can be transformed to give water, something contrary to its nature (Exodus), then too the bread and wine in Eucharist is transformed into the Body and Blood of Jesus by the invocation of the Holy Spirit.
so “Can two walk together unless they agree?”
Nice question, u ask the crucial Orthodox question.
This points to the necessity of aligning human free will with divine will. Orthodoxy teaches that communion in the Eucharist requires harmony with Christ’s character. St. Maximus the Confessor explains it the bestL
That synergia unites human and divine wills, enabling participation in God’s energies.
1 John 1:7 (YLT):
and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light – we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin
links Eucharist participation to a life of repentance and spiritual discipline.
Walking together requires agreement in will achieved through daily practice and sacramental communion. The Eucharist is the locus where this unity is realized as believers partake of Christ’s body and blood.

79

So do you believe what that doctrine goes on to assertain are only Catholics are forgiven, which pushes boasting, and guides seperativism. :thinking:

For trust should never be in doctrines, But Jesus. Jesus is the main line. The foundation in which truth is built and freedom flows from.

And you are right nothing is impossible with God. He can make a man stand where He is.

However is that what is truly meant by His words: That the wine turns into His blood and the bread His body?

As said by a once grand philosopher and Theologian, Dallas, the mystery is not about the wine &bread but the impartation of Himself.

We bring our life into the life that “God is living”

The power of forgiveness is always available as we remain in his teachings. And God can use any ideal to do what He pleases.. Certainly nothing is impossible with those who believe.

For if we walk by the Spirit we have fellowship with one another and His blood cleanses us from all unrighteousness. ( do you believe forgiveness is only at your communion services?)

80

It can be boiled down to work. Some of us were chosen to do his work, that doesnt necessarily mean that we are predestined for heaven. We still have to accept Jesus. God desires that we come home, but there are rules. Similar to the parent that puts there children on the street. Not every homes rules are meant for everybody, or we would all live under the same roof. Gods roof is simple to live under. Accept Jesus as God, and follow the rules. In a sense we are all predestined for heaven, because we have the choice. It would be foolish now knowing to choose otherwise. Being as smart as you apparently are means that you should pinpoint foolishness. Dont call them stupid, but let people know when and why they are being foolish. Being foolish ultimately leads to becoming a fool. Its like training for a job. If you laugh at a joke that you dont think is funny, your understanding of what is funny will eventually wither away. Because you are laughing when you really dont find anything funny. There are rules to funny. If you perform in front of a crowd of fools theyll laugh at anything, and this doesnt mean that you are funny.

81

I was talking about orthodoxy, not catholicism. Now I have set the background for the discussion.
Forgiveness
U claim that the Eucharist implies forgiveness exclusive to Catholics and misrepresents the economy of salvation. Orthodoxy teaches that forgiveness is mediated through grace via repentance accessible through multiple sacraments including baptism, confession and Eucharist, lets get that right first. St. John Chrysostom explains that the Eucharist applies Christ’s propitiation (1 John 2:2) to those who partake worthily but forgiveness is not confined to it. The Church practices closed communion to preserve communion within the body of Christ, requiring right belief and repentance. St. Cyril of Jersualem teaches that Eucharist makes believers co-bodied and co-blooded with Christ, necessitating unity in faith.
*This accusation of separatism appears to overlook the Church’s role as the pillar and foundation of Truth ( 1 Tim 3:5). Ur rejection of sacramental structure risks a gnostic individualism severing communion from the tradition. Orthodoxy’s closed communion reflects philanthropia, guarding the sacrament, while inviting all to repentance.
2.Dallas Willard
U said that Willard claims the “mystery” of the Eucharist lies in Christ’s impartation denying the transformation of bread and wine into his body and blood. Orthodoxy asserts that the invocation of the Spirit effects an ontological change, making the elements Christ’s body and blood.
John 6:53-56 is merciless:
“Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you". The Eucharist is a participation in Christ’s hypostasis, engaging His energies, not His essence, enabling divinization.
Then are we contradicting that “We bring our life into the life that God is living”. If the Eucharist is merely a symbol, it cannot mediate the ontological life you claim to seek. John 5:55 “My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink” destroys your noetic reductionism, are u claiming for a gnostic denial of the somatic divine-human union.
3.Trust in Jesus
U demand to trust in Jesus, not doctrines, calling Jesus as the “main line”..true nobody disagrees, but most the the West dont know how doctrines are made. Orthodoxy affirms Christ as the beginning and end, but the tradition of the Church preserves His Word. 2 Thess 2:15, “Hold fast to the tradition, whether by word or epistle”. The Eucharist is a sacrament, not a doctrine, let’s make that clear first. It mediates grace through hypostatic communion.
Can i flip it back, like ur reliance on Wilard’s impartation is itself a “doctrin”, doesnt it contradict ur rejection of doctrines? Ur appeal to Jesus as the “main line” requires the tradition to know the Word as 1 Tim 3:15 calls the Church the pillar and foundation of the Truth. By dismissing tradition, you trap urself in a gnostic individualism unable to access the truth you claim to proritize.
Separatism
U allege that the Eucharist implies exclusive forgiveness and separatism, u misrepresent Orthodoxy.
Forgiveness flows through grace via repentacne with the Eucharist as the culmination of sacraments. 1 Cor 11:27-29 demands discernment of the body, lest one partake unworthily and incur judgment. Orthodoxy’s closed communion preserves communion within the Church, requiring right belief and repentance, not separatism but unity as in Eph 4:3.
U said “Can two walk together unless they agree”. If agreement in will is required, as u insist, then the Church’s demand for faith in Eucharist is logical, not separatist. Your rejection of sacramental communion contradicts your appeal to communion in 1 John 1:7.
You demand for unity but then rejects its Ontological foundation in the body of Christ.
5.Living in God’s Life
U call to “bring our life into the life that God is living”, isnt that theosis ur talking about?, yet ur symbolic view oblietrates its ontological foundation. The Eucharist is the participation in Christ’s energies, enabling synergia between free-will and divine will. 2 Peter 1:4 promises participation in the divine nature through energies, not essence. The Eucharist makes believers Christ-bearers, transforming their character.
Ur saying that “life that God is living” requires ontological participation, which ur symbolic impartation cannot deliver. ur noetic reduction contradicts ur own words as “living in God’s life” demands the bodily communion of John 6:56 that “Whoever eats mu flesh and drinks by blood, remains in me”. Are u aiming for a gnositic abstraction, devoid of divine-human reality is the main question here.
6. Luke 1:37
U say God can use any means. Orthodoxy affirms God’s power but His economy of salvation operates through the Church and sacraments. 1 Corinthians 11:24-25 records Christ’s command. The Eucharist is the energy of theosis.
Ur appeal to divine omnipotence implodes as ur reliance on Christ’s blood in 1 John 1:7 points to the Eucharist, which ur reject. Ur claim that “God can use any ideal” contradicts Christ’s explicit institution of the sacrament, thus u went into a syncretistic dismissal of the economy of salvation.