Posted on 05/26/2007 4:32:30 PM PDT by Titanites
I am a convert to the Catholic Faith from Calvinism. I loved Calvinism and owned a library full of Calvin, Luther, Warfield, Hodge, Murray, Owen, Machen, etc. as well as helped plant a local Orthodox Presbyterian Church. I knew Reformation Theology and how much hatred it generates for the Catholic Church. As a Calvinist, I could boast with the best of them. I even persecuted the Catholic Church and went after every one of them I found, beating them back with Scripture, upon Scripture, upon quotes of Luther, Calvin, etc. I found great pleasure in debating Catholics.
My one flaw was learning what the Early Church Fathers believed. A Catholic who had not fared well in a debate with me, mentioned I should read the Early Church Fathers to see just how Catholic they were. I honestly thought I would just gain more "ammo" to use in my battles.
I found Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp with my first visit to the University Library. I poured over them for months until finally I pounded the books on the table with my fists, tossed them from the fourth to the third level of the library and wept. It seemed these great martyrs for the Faith were Catholic. It had taken about 8 months of going over Clement, Augustine, Athanasius, etc. to see the Catholic Church was the Early Church. I kept coming back to Ignatius and Polycarp as I could not get them out of my mind.
Over the next two years, I read more and more on the Catholic Faith and became less and less convinced the Reformed Faith was correct. It became clear to me; it was nothing more than a novelty, spewing forth doctrines that had never been believed before. Christ promised the Holy Spirit to His Church and stated the gates of hell would not prevail against it. I thought that was a lie and for 1500 years, the Church had been without truth and the gates of hell had prevailed. It is very humbling to come to the conclusion you have been horribly wrong, even to the point of not trusting the words of our precious Lord and Saviour. Yet, I still was not ready to become a Catholic.
Then one day when I was reading the Scripture I read Paul talking about how he was the most religious Pharisee, the most upright, and you know my heart was pierced and I actually laughed about how I could claim I had been one of the best Calvinists around, but then it hit me. Was that even something to boast about? So I looked up one of the most wonderful examples of boasting the Lord mentioned. Luke 18:9-14 (Please read the Scripture as this is my paraphrase)
'Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Calvinist and the other a sinner. The Calvinist (that would be I) stood and was praying thus to himself, God, I thank thee that I am not like other people, sinners, Catholics, heretics, or even like this sinner beside me. I planted your church in this god-forsaken part of the country, I read the Scriptures and Calvin and Luther twice a week, and the rest of the week I read nothing but reformers and your Scriptures. But the sinner standing a little off to the side, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast saying, God, be merciful to me the sinner. I tell you this man went down to his house justified rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled but he who humbles himself shall be exalted."
You know who the sinner was? I turned next to Luke 5:8 because I was then looking for others who admitted they were sinners for I knew I was once the boaster but now I was the sinner. "But when Simon Peter saw that, he fell down at Jesus' feet saying, Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord." Peter then was able to go on and follow Jesus. Peter came home, this home became the Church, and he was the Rock it was built upon, and he was justified.
At that moment, it finally became clear I could not stay a Calvinist or stay in the OPC. I had plans to attend Westminster Seminary and those were discarded. I lost friends and was informed I must have never been a Christian in the first place.
As I became least, Christ became more. I decided the only place I could go was the home where the Apostle Peter went. I was accepted into the Catholic Church in Easter 2002. I have never been happier and I wish and pray this joy for all. I will never be the same after taking the Body and Blood of our Lord.
Most Roman Catholics are not christians since they have never been born again.
They may believe in the Trinity but they have not received the free gift of salvation which only comes by FAITH ALONE
This is the finer point of the Roman Catholics and the Protestant Reformation and the very thing that separates true Catholics from true Protestants. Catholics call this cooperation. The Reformers didn't buy into it.
We know God prepared the heart to hear the word and that preparation must be perfect. We know faith comes from hearing the word. If God prepared Lydia's heart so that she would receive the word from Paul, do you think she would not have accepted it?
It's this preparation that is the new birth.
No it is not. The farmer can prepare his fields, tilling the soil, breaking up the hard ground, but until the seed is planted nothing can be generated. There is no new life without the seed taking root:
"Seeing that you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit ... being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever .... and this is the word which by the gospel was preached unto you". [I Peter 1:23-25]
Let's assume in your analogy God is the farmer. If God prepares His fields, tills the soil, break the ground and plants the seed, do you think that it won't grow? Doesn't God give the growth?
It won't grow until or unless the seed takes root and it is watered.
God prepared first century Israel for the visitation of the seed of the Word of God --- and yet the seed took root in only a small part of the ground that He had prepared.
Here is Charles Spurgeon on the matter:
"If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man, being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate. Am I only to preach faith to those who have it? Absurd, indeed! Is not this waiting till the man is cured and then bringing him the medicine? This is preaching Christ to the righteous and not to sinners".[C. H. Spurgeon: The Warrant of Faith]
Using the farmer's analogy, it would be like waiting for the crops to grow before casting the seed into the field.
“Most Roman Catholics are not christians since they have never been born again.”
There you all go again judging the state of everyones souls and hearts.
A Catholic is born again every single day of their life.
“For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.”
There is no way a human being can get through one day without offending in either thought, word, or deed because we have a fallen nature. Without Christ all is lost.
Peace to you.
LOL
No, either one is lost or one is saved (1Cor.1:18).
And one can only be saved by faith without works (Eph.2:8)
And one can know he is saved since the Scripture says that is what a believer knows when He has received Christ as his saviour (1Jn.5:16)
So, I am not judging anyone's heart, I am judging what the RCC teaches and which isn't salvation (faith plus works) and what Trent has condemned which is, justification by faith alone.
We cannot both be right.
Couple this with the authentic letter of Clement from about 80 AD and it’s difficult to believe that the Catholic/Orthodox Church isn't exactly what the Apostles intended to leave.Dating Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians is a fascinating pursuit. Years ago, I heard a patristics scholar who was lecturing on Clement's Epistle opine that it was written before A.D. 70 because the reference to the Temple in para. 41 is in the present case, whereas the earlier examples of order are always in the past tense. This particular scholar argued that if Clement had written to the Corinthians after the destruction of the Temple, he likely would have used past tense as he did for his other examples.
Let every one of you, brethren, give thanks to God in his own order, living in all good conscience, with becoming gravity, and not going beyond the rule of the ministry prescribed to him. Not in every place, brethren, are the daily sacrifices offered, or the peace-offerings, or the sin-offerings and the trespass-offerings, but in Jerusalem only. And even there they are not offered in any place, but only at the altar before the temple, that which is offered being first carefully examined by the high priest and the ministers already mentioned.Clement of Rome, Ad Cor. 41. According to the historians Tacitus and Josephus, there was literally nothing whatsoever left of the Temple after its destruction to sacrifice in. So, the argument goes, it's pretty clear from the grammatical evidence that First Clement was written before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
More to your point, the climax of Clement's Epistle is para. 44, which is the first extra-canonical expression of apostolic succession:
Similarly, our Apostles knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be dissensions over the title of bishop. In their full foreknowledge of this, therefore, they proceeded to appoint the ministers I spoke of, and they went on to add an instruction that if these should fall asleep, other accredited persons should succeed them in their office.This is the earliest extra-canonical statement of the doctrine of apostolic succession; i.e., that the Apostles not only appointed their successors but also granted them the authority that they had received from Christ personally to continue Christ's work in the world. That it should have been written before the New Testament had been completed and while at least one of the Apostles was still living is prima facie evidence of the influence of Peter and his successors, as well as the Church at Rome.
You're wrestling with a great truth of the gospel; not unlike Augustine or Spurgeon or any one of us true Reformer; doesn't God open our ears, unblind our eyes, and blesses our hearts to receive His word? It goes to the heart of the blessed Cyprian's question to Augustine, "What do you have that you have not received?" Spurgeon also grapped with this question:
Spurgeon is right. We are the deliverers of the message. We don't know who's heart God has cultivated. We are asked of God to be faithful in throwing the seed out so that He will use it in the proper place.
“We cannot both be right.”
Exactly. And pre-empting God’s authority by judging the state of another’s soul is a huge sin.
The random scripture generator thrown into an argument is just another attempt to justify one’s need to judge another’s soul.
God’s judges souls and hearts. Men have laws because we are fallen. Don’t confuse the authority to judge by the laws with God’s authority to see the hidden things of the heart and soul.
You don’t have the authority to judge the soul. No one save God has that.
And preaching a false Gospel is a greater sin (Gal.1)
The random scripture generator thrown into an argument is just another attempt to justify one’s need to judge another’s soul. God’s judges souls and hearts. Men have laws because we are fallen. Don’t confuse the authority to judge by the laws with God’s authority to see the hidden things of the heart and soul.
I raised a simple question with you.
Which is the correct Biblical view on salvation.
Is it faith plus works or faith plus nothing?
God is going to judge each person on which one he has accepted and which one he has rejected.
You don’t have the authority to judge the soul. No one save God has that.
I have the authority, as a believer to tell you how a soul is saved.
It is your responsiblity to accept or reject it.
Save the 'who am I to judge' nonsense.
Christ told the Jews to make a right judgement.
God will judge the hearts, He judges to see if the heart has been changed by faith in Christ (Tit.3:5)
If not, that person will be standing at the Great White Throne Judgement explaining why he called God a liar (1Jn.5:10)
So answer the question, is Trent right or was Luther?
See my last post.
Not Luther, that’s for sure.
We won’t agree at all.
You believe your way but do not make blanket assumptions that Catholics are not Christians.
As for everyone on the planet?
You might get a surprise on judgment day when those people who you consider headed for eternal fire are not because God put something in their natures for some edification or purpose you cannot fathom.
The very last thing I will ever do is judge another person’s soul as to who is God’s and who is not.
I can judge him according to the law both secular and religious, and I can judge who is in error, but I will never venture to say whose soul is better or worse than yours or mine.
Christ as King on that throne will let us know.
Peace to you and good day.
I've seen this line tossed out all over the forum by RCs who should know better. The generator" is the Bible and there's nothing "random" about it. We're told to live according to the word of God. If it's not in Scripture, it's error.
"The Bible is thought of as authoritative on everything of which it speaks. Moreover, it speaks of everything. We do not mean that it speaks of football games, of atoms, etc., directly, but we do mean that it speaks of everything either directly or by implication. It tells us not only of the Christ and his work, but it also tells us who God is and where the universe about us has come from. It tells us about theism as well as about Christianity. It gives us a philosophy of history as well as history. Moreover, the information on these subjects is woven into an inextricable whole. It is only if you reject the Bible as the word of God that you can separate the so-called religious and moral instructions of the Bible from what it says, e.g., about the physical universe." -- Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1976), p.2.
"That God's word damns your ceremonies it is evident; for the plain and straight commandment of God is, 'Not that thing which appears good in thy eyes shalt thou do to the Lord thy God, but what the Lord thy God has commanded thee; that do thou; add nothing to it; diminish nothing from it.' Now unless you are able to prove that God has commanded your ceremonies, this his former commandment will damn both you and them." -- John Knox (Knox, Works, 1:199. Cf. Calvin, The Necessity of Reforming the Church, in Tracts, 1:128-29.)
He burneth part thereof in the fire; with part thereof he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast, and is satisfied: yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire: And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me; for thou art my god. They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand. And none considereth in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, I have burned part of it in the fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I have roasted flesh, and eaten it: and shall I make the residue thereof an abomination? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree? He feedeth on ashes: a deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand?" -- Isaiah 44:15-20"Then shall it be for a man to burn: for he will take thereof, and warm himself; yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread; yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it; he maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto.
Oh, you can make assumptions that those who believe as Luther are not saved but we who believe as he does, can't say the same about your works system (Gal.1)
As for everyone on the planet? You might get a surprise on judgment day when those people who you consider headed for eternal fire are not because God put something in their natures for some edification or purpose you cannot fathom.
So, now God is going to deny His own words (Jn.14:6)?
No one is getting to heaven except by the believing on the saving Blood of Christ (Rom.3:25)
The very last thing I will ever do is judge another person’s soul as to who is God’s and who is not.
If a person has not believed on Christ, I am not judging his soul, God's words are.
I can judge him according to the law both secular and religious, and I can judge who is in error, but I will never venture to say whose soul is better or worse than yours or mine.
I can venture to say which soul is saved or not and if you are adding works to your faith to be saved, you are still lost.
Paul says anyone who preaches such a false Gospel should have an anathema on him.
Imagine Paul being so judgmental!
Christ as King on that throne will let us know.
Yes, He will, but if you end up at the Great White Throne Judgment,(Rev.20) instead of the Judgment Seat of Christ (Rom.14:20) it is to late then.
Peace to you and good day.
Likewise.
It was just after I became Catholic that I "discovered" the Church Fathers. I know this isn't the usual sequence of events. But finding that the early Church was so clearly the Church I'd just joined was a wonderful gift.
Polycarp, in particular, is about as unroman as you can get. It was his testimony to Irenius that totally demolished their idea of the early writing of The Revelation.
I agree. They sound like Christians without trappings....evangelical, determined, Pauline.
Actually, that comment was Lee’s, but we appear to be in unison on that point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.