Posted on 10/03/2018 7:21:05 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Let us begin with a church history exam question. Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621) was a figure not to be taken lightly. He was Pope Clement VIII’s personal theologian and one of the most able figures in the Counter-Reformation movement within sixteenth-century Roman Catholicism. On one occasion, he wrote: “The greatest of all Protestant heresies is _______ .”
...How would you answer? What is the greatest of all Protestant heresies?
...What he wrote was: “The greatest of all Protestant heresies is assurance.”
A moment’s reflection explains why. If justification is not by faith alone, in Christ alone, by grace alone — if faith needs to be completed by works; if Christ’s work is somehow repeated; if grace is not free and sovereign, then something always needs to be done, to be “added” for final justification to be ours. That is exactly the problem. If final justification is dependent on something we have to complete it is not possible to enjoy assurance of salvation. For then, theologically, final justification is contingent and uncertain, and it is impossible for anyone (apart from special revelation, Rome conceded) to be sure of salvation. But if Christ has done everything, if justification is by grace, without contributory works; it is received by faith’s empty hands — then assurance, even “full assurance” is possible for every believer.
(Excerpt) Read more at ligonier.org ...
Well, St Paul didn’t have it.
“I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified [Gk., dedikaiomai]. It is the Lord who judges me” (1 Cor. 4:4).
***
Typical Catholic response to take St. Paul’s proclamation of the amazing grace of God and turn it into stealing salvation away from the rest of the world.
The idea of image (eikôn) is a biblical category — man made in the image of God, Christ the image of the invisible God. However, beyond this, everything is iconic for the Reformed. God has imprinted evidence of His own beauty and glory throughout creation. “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork” (Ps. 19:1–2).
What Calvinism did was to enable a this-worldly appreciation of beauty. By eliminating art and sculpture from church worship, it drove it into the world, placing the aesthetic in the context of general revelation, as the witness to God in the world rather than as the focus of the worship of God in the church. The result was the enormous flowering of creativity in post-Reformation culture, centering not on the supernatural realm of angels and demons, but on the world around reflecting the glory and beauty of God.
So, you approve of his tirades against the Jews then?
***
Right, as if Rome has anything to brag about.
Luther wrote one exasperated tract after hearing that Jewish converts to Christ were being forced back into Judaism.
Rome spent centuries systematically torturing and murdering Jews.
So be Catholic, plebs, because Rome had the guts to go all the way to mass murder.
bump
Rome and Luther are separated by centuries. Not so the Jews, with their multi-thousand year rites.
I’d recommend a bit more reading on the subject.
Your last sentence doesn’t seem to make sense.
Anecdotal incoming, I have seen beautiful Christians justifying serious sins they were proud of (Adultery/marrying their adultery partner, abandoning their children, wife swapping within the congregation where two couples divorcing their spouses and then marrying the other partner while their kids become emotionally numb, embezzlement, ect...).
P.S. all these people were in the good graces of their Church and Pastor because they confessed their sin (But auspiciously refused to repent and laid blamed mind you of their actions for some reason while the damage still lingered).
It’s called sarcasm; learn it.
Oh, and ‘Rome’=’Roman Catholic’
AS a Lutheran, of the Missouri Synod persuasion, I can say that much has been said in my church about this. The issue is one of timing. We believe that we are saved by grace alone, through faith, FOR works.
The believer is not saved, by his works, but the works are rather the logical output of a person who has the assurance of salvation. The works demonstrate that we are saved; they don’t save us. The good works that Christ prepared for us to do are our fruits. Jesus said, “by their fruits, you will know them.” James says, “Show me your faith by what you say; I will show you mine by what I do.”
As Christians, we should seek to do good works out of gratitude to God for his grace, and therefore our faith. We will still mess up and sin and do wrong, but that is being human. That said , it’s not a loophole. We must acknowledge our sin and seek forgiveness by our repentance and prayer. Our assurance rests on the fact that Christ died for us and that we know, because God is no liar, that if we believe (and everything that comes with that), we will be saved.
Hope this helps.
Your answer and explanation simply makes entirely too much reasonable sense… Therefore in this day and age you must be entirely wrong!
By the way, good answer.
That is really the gist of the argument. Do we depend upon Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for our sins or do we depend upon our own works of righteousness to redeem us? I think God's word is pretty clear that it is NOT by our works righteousness that we are saved but by the mercy and grace of God. Salvation is the GIFT of God. To make a gift dependent upon what we do to earn or merit it negates that it is a gift.
I believe Paul had assurance of salvation. So do I. It’s a wonderful thing. I have no idea why some seem to not want assurance of salvation, but that’s on them.
So did I, except it was MORE than 33 years ago. 😁😊😇👊 I don’t remember my confirmation name either, but it doesn’t matter. I repented of that too.
Paul had total assurance.
“Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”
You mean as compared to that of Roman Catholicism ? Objectively speaking?
Well said.
Paul certainly did have that assurance.
He said that ti live is Christ and to die is gain and he was looking forward to dying and being with Christ.
Not *hoping* to be with Him, but being with Him.
It’s not optional. It’s a matter of who does the works, and who should get the credit for them.
“I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.” John 15:5
“I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” Galatians 2:20
Posting articles on FR thinking they will somehow have the power to "convert" a Catholic (or anyone else for that matter)
Note, that goes for any Catholic who does the same with the same intention.
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.