The Reformers and Church Fathers on Nature, Grace, and Choice

Vanity, vanity, everything is vanity | December 29, 2001 | Andrew Reeves (me)

[AndrewSshi]

I noticed that we've got several free will threads going on here, so I figured I'd throw my own hat into the ring by recycling my History term paper from last semester.

[f.Christian]

News From Dr.Ford

"With Martin Luther we can joyously proclaim: 'Mine is Christs living and dying as if I had lived his life and died his death.' Thus, sanctification is always the fruit of Christian experience, and never the root. When John Wesley heard the gospel, he gave up his legalism but continued his self-denying life, not now as the root, but as the fruit of his faith".

Dr.Desmond Ford..."Right With God--- Right Now"! Page 272

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

The Catholic Epistle Of St. James The Apostle 2:24 "Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only."

The Catholic Epistle Of St. James The Apostle 2:26 "For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead."

"Sola Fide" is bunk.

[RnMomof7]

FYI

[the_doc]

According to Romans 3:28, Sola Fide is by no means "bunk."

The Apostle Paul explicitly states in Romans 3:28 that a man is justified before God apart from works of the Law.

The Apostle James was warning about the kind of assensus which masquerades as faith. Calvin resolved The Epistle of James and the Epistle to the Romans in a very simple statement. He pointed out that man is justified by faith alone, but the faith that really justifies is never alone. This explains both the practical verses of James and the high doctrine of Paul. And this standard Protestant explanation is evidently the only sensible way to resolve the tension.

[the_doc]

This thread is not my cup of tea. I suspect it is yours, however.

Regards,

[RnMomof7]

"Sola Fide" is bunk.

Does this mean that God can not save on his own?

Isaiah 59:1 Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save;

[Romulus]

Are you saying that God will save a man who rejects him?

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

You are probably reading from a Protestant Bible and thus are including what Luther added to Romans 3:28, which is the word "alone". If you can read Latin, you'll see that it is not included in the Vulgate, but if not, you can see that it isn't in the English translation of the Vulgate; Douay-Rheims. The Epistle Of St. Paul The Apostle To The Romans 3:28 "For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law." This is just one example of why Luther's doctrines are indeed bunk. He choose to edit Sacred Scripture to his liking, which was/is a violation of Sacred Scripture; The Apocalypse of St. John the Apostle 22:19. This doesn't even take into account his rejection of the Apocrypha. Imagine if Bill and Hill took the Bill of Rights and edited it to their liking. That's what Luther did with the Bible.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

God can do whatever He wants.

[the_doc]

I think you are just missing the obvious point of Romans 3:28. Even without Luther's "help" in the German translation, Romans 3:28 says exactly what I said it says.

It says a man is justified by faith APART FROM WORKS OF THE LAW. Since the issues in the context were faith and works, the Apostle Paul himself, not merely Luther, is saying that justification is by faith ALONE, i.e., APART FROM WORKS OF THE LAW.

So, Luther's ALONE idea is the idea of the Apostle's text. Luther apparently put the word "alone" in his German-language translation because he was irked at Rome for continually missing the point of the verse.

The word "alone" does not appear in the Greek text (and I don't even care about the Latin text), but the "alone" idea is certainly there.

And as I said in my post, John Calvin's famous explanation of justification is right on target. It readily explains the verse you cited from the Epistle of James. However, the Romanist doctrine of faith-plus-works doesn't have any way of explaining Romans 3:28!

And this is the bottom-line reason why consistent Protestants reject ECT.

[rdb3]

He called and accepted Saul of Tarsus, didn't He?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

FYI

[Elsie]

True. Saul rejected Christ.

Then he "saw the light" and Paul ACCEPTED Him.

---

We have ALL rejected Him until we, too, Saw the Light!

---

"Grace greater than ALL my sin"

---

Acts 8

 1.  And Saul was there, giving approval to his death.   On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.
 2.  Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him.
 3.  But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.

 

Acts 9
 18.  Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized,
 19.  and after taking some food, he regained his strength.   Saul spent several days with the disciples in Damascus.
 20.  At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.
 21.  All those who heard him were astonished and asked, "Isn't he the man who raised havoc in Jerusalem among those who call on this name? And hasn't he come here to take them as prisoners to the chief priests?"
 22.  Yet Saul grew more and more powerful and baffled the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Christ. (from the OT, I might add!)

 

1 Corinthians 15:7-10
 7.  Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,
 8.  and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
 9.  For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
 10.  But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them--yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me.

[Elsie]

And this is the bottom-line reason why consistent Protestants reject ECT.

---

I'm afraid I do not know what ECT means.

[rdb3]

Thank you, sister. You helped me prove my point. I was being rather rhetorical in my question to him.

Saul of Tarsus was a persecutor of Christ's church. When Christ revealed Himself to Saul, this was the fulfillment of Our Father's predestination of Saul, who (as all true believers are) was chosen since eternity. As it is written, "Many are called, but few are chosen."

The Apostle Paul taught this lesson many, many times.

[George W. Bush]

ECT is Evangelicals and Catholics Together.

Some big name evangelicals like Chuck Colson and Bill Bright and many other well-known evangelicals got together with some Catholics to ecumenize.

It's a farce. The articles I most like are the following ones by Richard Bennett at his BereanBeacon.org website. He also has ECT articles by several other authors that are quite good.

A desrcription of ECT and its errors:
The Alignment of New Evangelicals with Apostasy

This Bennett article demonstrates that ECT was merely a trap to draw evangelicals into the church of Rome as revealed by the pope's decree. This left the ecumenists exposed for anyone to see what had really happened.
Dominus Iesus: Rome Exalts Her Throne (A Kiss of Death for the Ecumenists)

I think you'll like these Bennett articles. I've read them several times and always refer to them when the subject of ecumenization with Rome comes up. They are brief but thorough treatments of the subject. Bennett is a former R.C. priest and is very well-versed in Rome's strategies and ploys to support her unbiblical doctrines.

[George W. Bush]

I did discover a brand-new Bennett article. It describes the history of Islam and Rome and the Pope's official statements concerning Islam since 9/11 and ties this together with Bush's statements. I'm thinking about posting it here at FR but it might be a little bit of a barn-burner with our RC FRiends. Well, some of them. I know there is a certain dissent on this subject within Rome's camp. You think it should be posted here?

The Papacy and Islam

[RnMomof7]

I have an extensive history with the RC Cursillo movement,and with some of the off shoot ecumenical ministries. When God found me lost and alone I needed some early support on my exit. I found it in the protestants that I knew through the ecumenical ministries.

The truth is doctrinally we have very little common ground with Catholics ,so to believe that we can work together to bring the unchurched or pagan masses to a beliving faith in Jesus Christ is pure foolisness.

ECT huh? Chuck Colson huh? We have to be careful to handle the word of God carefully and to pass it on without error. I am sorry that Chuck has compromised his faith and ministry like that.The truth is that when you join two such differnt faiths they are unequally yoked!

[good1]

if one is to be saved by faith alone, then man, shorn of his free will, is reduced to the role of a puppet dancing on God’s strings.

It is just here that many make an illogical and improper leap.

Often, as this writer has just done, thinkers will follow closely, and correctly, the Biblical text and teaching, but suddenly, for some unknown reason, jump to a thoroughly un-Biblical conclusion. They then proceed from there to go completely astray in their theological thinking.

Man's will is not free. It is either unregerate and bound by sin, or it is regenerate and the bondage of the sin-bound will is broken. Hence the Bible writer's proclaimation that he is the "slave" of Christ (Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1).

If the writer would adhere closely to the Biblical text and avoid the pitfalls of such erroneous thinking, he would not confuse himself with a host of other difficulties.