Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Dutchboy88
Well, upon that logic, Catholics should believe the pope would be suspect for most of what he says, because he speaks infallible ex-cathedra only about once every 5 years. Correct?

Not correct. He speaks infallibly only when he is expressly teaching in the name of the entire Church on issues of doctrine or morals. Usually there is an anathema attached to it.

And falling back on the Scriptures is a nice theoretical but it never works that way in real life. Because for some reason I can't quite fathom, my Scripture interpretation as a Catholic seems to always be the wrong interpretation for the people who toe that line, despite it having the most Patristic and exegetical support IMHO. I'm not sure why the Holy Ghost fails me as a believer coming to the Bible, yet somehow Calvin and Sproul are always on target!

So back to the question of the thread. Is Calvin's position here heretical or not?

90 posted on 09/21/2009 2:39:35 PM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]


To: Claud; Dutchboy88
I see "heresy" mentioned a lot on the Religion page. Would you explain what you mean by "heresy" and how that definition differs from "aberrant teaching" or "error"?

Thanks

94 posted on 09/21/2009 3:01:38 PM PDT by suzyjaruki (What is coming next?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

To: Claud

The second paragraph is unintelligible. Catholics around here have noted that you cannot have an opinion of the Scripture that is other than the headquarter’s approved version. Otherwise you are a despicable YPIOS (like me) or somthing like that (Your private interpretation of Scriptures?). So, your you really cannot have a view of your own or it would would be abhorrent to the Catholic Church. Calvin or Sproul notwithstanding.

But, if your view was handled well hermeneutically and was consistent with the argument of the biblical writer, I might even prefer yours over theirs.

For those of us not beholden to the Vatican monster, we have the freedom, no the obligation, to search the Scriptures and see if these things be so.

As to the heretical nature of Calvin’s view of Jesus suffering in hell...think of it like this:

A heresy is something which radically affects the Gospel so much so that the reader would misunderstand salvation or a significant characteristic about God. The Catholic Church routinely teaches heresy because it leads people to believe that the seven sacraments and absolution of sin by priests will produce salvation. This is why the Catholic on the street is so concerned about final unction, confessional booths, and other such extra-biblical behaviors far more than justification by faith as taught by Paul. Rome therefore is guilty of heresy.

If, OTOH, the Catholic Church taught that Peter had a 45 foot steel fishing boat, that would be incorrect, but NOT heretical. Catch the difference?

If Calvin thought Jesus suffered in hell, the fact of the matter is that no one knows exactly what went on in the life of Jesus between the cross and Sunday morning. We do know that His propitiation brought redemption to the elect.

Calvin’s speculation is not critical to salvation, nor does it represent a potential misunderstanding about God. We know from Scripture that He was not abandoned to hell, but beyond that it is not determinable. Thus, this is not heresy.


100 posted on 09/21/2009 3:24:15 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson