Thanks for the reply. It seems the most important "ology" you posted is soteriology. I know of no differences in the Calvinist and Arminian postions of saved by Grace through faith. There may be differences on free will vs. election but I believe you get enough of that here. Boils down to both groups take the face value of the gospel of Grace. Arminians and Calvinists break bread together. Whether free will or election, both agree, well we don't know who the elect are only God does.
Which brings us to what authority the apostles told us we can rely on and that is the God inspired Scriptures:
2 Timothy 3:
10 But you have carefully followed my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, love, perseverance, 11 persecutions, afflictions, which happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra—what persecutions I endured. And out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
We should remember at this point in time Paul and other apostles had some epistles in circulation, but the scriptures in which Paul tells Timothy "Holy Scriptures" would be what is now the OT. We also have the Bereans in Acts 17 searching the scriptures (again we can be pretty certain only the OT scriptures available at this point) diligently to see if Paul's inspired message of the Gospel to them is true. In the same passage in Acts 17 the statement is made that the Bereans seemed more "fair minded" than the Thessalonians. This becomes important as we look at Paul's first letter to the Thessalonians, which admonishes them for not following the words of Paul, believing in stories of others claiming to be apostles; therefore Paul had to put in writing what they needed to know, thus the epistles to them.
Please I understand "stir the pot" is what happens at FR and makes it a great place to come. You were polite and reasoned and I hope I addressed what you asked. Maybe I just don't see a big difference in Arminian doctrine as a Calvinist might see, but ask them, they are not calling each other heretics. They may disagree on finer points but they both ascribe and believe in the Gospel as stated by Jesus Christ in Luke 24 and explained in detail in 1 Corinthians 15.
Now on issues of eschatology, I don't even think there are any protestants or evangelicals who would call each other heretics or will not break bread with over eschatology. There may be one exception in that full prederists believe the second coming of Christ is past (happened in 70 AD) and the resurrection is something ongoing and there is no literal judgment day. Most protestants and evangelicals would say such a position is in error. Other than this group (very small) good Christians can be in disagreement over eschatology because we all believe Jesus Christ is coming again as evidenced in Acts 1, Revelation 1 and many other refs, and He will judge the living and the dead. amillennials, millennials, pre-trib, post-trib no trib, all know at some point that the Gospels and epistles tell us Jesus is coming again to put an end to this temporal world. Evangelicals do not see a reason for division over the timeline that is clearly in God's Hands. All believe to watch and be ready and be found worthy of His return.
Now, I am glad you did not use the tactic some use here. I don't need explain David Koresh, Jim Jones, JWs, Mormons and all other cult groups given those groups live not by scriptures as the authority but their cult leader or group provides their marching orders.
Finally, being a guy who has been on both sides of the Tiber I understand your points and frankly we (prots and RCs) will probably never resolve them corporately. Tradition and history is very important to your Church, I respect that. What I cannot see is how one bishop (Lord of the Rings here) forged a ring to rule them (other bishops) all. As I see the scriptures and even the post apostolic early church, I don't see that one ring rules them all. And, I state here, I too am not trying to stir the pot:) Thanks again Mark...
I always thought that Calvinists believed in "irresistible grace" -- if you are called, you will not be able to resist. And then faith was an inevitable result of that "irresistible grace" (again, I could be wrong here...), while Arminians believe that grace is conditioned by faith and that without faith, you wouldn't have the grace.
Catholic doctrine pretty much holds to the belief of Eph 2:7-9: [Eph 2:7-9 KJV] 7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in [his] kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
As stated by the 2nd Council of Orange (Dz 178) Can. 5. If anyone says, that just as the increase [of faith] so also the beginning of faith and the very desire of credulity, by which we believe in Him who justifies the impious, and (by which) we arrive at the regeneration of holy baptism (is) not through the gift of grace, that is, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit reforming our will from infidelity to faith, from impiety to piety, but is naturally in us, he is proved (to be) antagonistic to the doctrine of the Apostles, since blessed Paul says: We trust, that he who begins a good work in us, will perfect it unto the day of Christ Jesus (Ph 1,6); and the following: It was given to you for Christ not only that you may believe in Him, but also, that you may suffer for Him (Ph 1,29); and: By grace you are made safe through faith, and this not of yourselves; for it is the gift of God (Ep 2,8). For those who say that faith, by which we believe in God, is natural, declare that all those who are alien to the Church of Christ are in a measure faithful [cf. St. Augustine].
As for the 2 Timothy reference, I think it is appropriate to continue and not stop at verse 17:
[2Ti 4:1-5 KJV] 1 I charge [thee] therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
Finally, being a guy who has been on both sides of the Tiber I understand your points and frankly we (prots and RCs) will probably never resolve them corporately. Tradition and history is very important to your Church, I respect that. What I cannot see is how one bishop (Lord of the Rings here) forged a ring to rule them (other bishops) all. As I see the scriptures and even the post apostolic early church, I don't see that one ring rules them all. And, I state here, I too am not trying to stir the pot:) Thanks again Mark...
I realize that ...now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face..., and so we likely won't ever come to a full agreement on things.
And, to be candid, I am not offended by, and can get on with, the Orthodox view of things (which provides each autocephalous Church with considerably more authority than the Latin version and grants the bishop of the Church of Rome more of a "honorific" type of primacy). But there, they are even more closely guided by the Church fathers and the Holy Councils of the Church throughout time than even we Catholics are.
And, I state here, I too am not trying to stir the pot:) Thanks again Mark...
We are brothers in Christ whether we agree on things or not; so there's no sense in being ugly if there is a conversation to have.
“We should remember at this point in time Paul and other apostles had some epistles in circulation, but the scriptures in which Paul tells Timothy “Holy Scriptures” would be what is now the OT.”
This is not totally accurate, as the Apostles believed that they were scripture producers, with all the rights and powers that every Prophet of God has ever had. Observe:
2Pe_3:16 As also in all his [Paul’s] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Peter here calls the epistles of Paul to all be scripture.
1Ti_5:18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.
In this case, Paul quotes the Gospel of Luke right alongside the Talmud. Compare:
Luk 10:7 And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.
To say that Paul was only speaking of the Old Testament is to ignore the point that Paul believed himself to be WRITING scripture TO Timothy.
“Arminians and Calvinists”
Neither the Arminian nor the Catholic position (which are both synergistic) can actually survive an examination of the scripture. In order for their claims to work, the saving grace of God must be universal, and it must be uniform in its application. Everyone must receive the same grace, and the same type of grace, in order to make God “fair” according to their positions. But, that is not what we see in scripture. For example:
“But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
(Joh 6:64-65)
All these men were standing before Christ, and hearing the same message. Yet, to those who do not believe, Christ specifically tells them that the reason they do not believe is because “it was not granted” by the Father. We are not told here that God foreknew, perhaps, their wickedness, or that God foreknew their faithlessness and therefore “did not give it” based on this knowledge. We are only told that God foreknew His own work, in giving it to some to believe, but not all.