Will the Pope's Pronouncement Set Ecumenism Back a Hundred Years? (Challenge to Apostolicity)

Progressive Theology ^ | July 07

[fortheDeclaration]

Wycliffe's translation was a horrible one. The KJV has been proven to be substantially in error. Ditto all those unauthorized versions in all the other languages.

The KJV has never proven to be in error.

[fortheDeclaration]

Try the second meaning. It wouldn’t support it.

Why should I be limited to the second meaning, when the first meaning does support it!

[irishtenor]

Now you know the trouble we have been having with him.

[fortheDeclaration]

Let's start with a pedantic quibble! That'll be fun, class, right? Well here it is: They were calling God "immutable" before Webster was a gleam in his daddy's eye. Heck, they were calling Him immutable before English was a gleam in the OED's eye! or Shakespeare's eye! That is my silly way of saying what somebody else said, namely: words like Passion and immutable are almost "terms of art' in theology, and a great part of the problem is vocabulary, I'd guess. Similarly with "pleased" and "pleasure". In the quote you offer we got "ευδοκησα". I haul out the Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich and I find .... uh .... ευδοκεω to no one's surprise. And the first meaning is "consider good, consent, determine" and the second is, wait for it ... " be well pleased, take delight" and they show a number of places in the LXX where it means for God to take pleasure in someone. Thou payest thy money and thou takest thy choice, I guess.

And when you read those words you are reading them in English and thus, that is the language we think in.

Now, the point of the definition of immutable was to show that it didn't mean immobile only that all of God's attributes are never compromised, that is can change or be lessoned.

All of those attributes work in perfect harmony with one another, so the essential point of immutability is the fact that the perfect harmony of God's Person can never be compromised, not that His Perfection paralyzes Him.

[ Anytime a Christian is not bearing the fruits of the Spirit (Gal.5:22-23), he is sinning. ]

One is either in the Spirit or in the Flesh. (Rom.6) Yeah, but I don't get the relevance. I bear some of my best fruits when I don't feel like it.

You only bear fruit when it is God producing them, that is when you under control by God and not your flesh.

So, your feelings are irrelevant to what is being produced, you may actually be physically ill at the time.

[ Nothing ever happens to God, God allows certain things to occur,... ]

Here's where we need some serious front porch with lemonade time. To me the phrase "happens to God" would include the things He allows to happen to Him (Which would be the only things that could "happen to" Him.) I'm guessing you are using the phrase to include something like "without His consent" and "catches Him by surprise" (which seems to be the Process theology stand and the main part of why I dumped Process Theology. I couldn't wrap my mind around God saying,"Son of GUN! Look at THAT! Who'da thunk it?!) But more to the point, and this is coming together in a way, am I correct in understanding you to say that nothing "happens to" God unless He willed it first? Would that be an acceptable formulation?

Yes, nothing happens unless God has willed it to happen, and it either falls under His 'directive will' (those things God wants to happen and in accordance with His Plan) and 'Permissive will', )those things that God allows to happen even though they go against His own directive will-like sin.)

Let me parse my "model" for passion, and then distinguish it from what I think you are saying: I walk along the store fronts in the Mall. I am dieting (as always) I pass the Ice Cream Sundae store. Without my permission, my mouth waters, and images and recollections of previous Sundaes dance in my head. My thitherto manly and purposeful stride visibly falters. Thoughts of whatever trinket I was about to buy from Radio Shack suddenly fade. My steps slow and I turn ninety degrees and assume an attitude of thoughtfulness. "After all," I say, "A geegaw from Radio shack is but a means to an end, while a Hot Fudge Sundae on coffee ice cream with marshmallow AND whipped Cream is an end in itself!" All recollection of the frustration I underwent when trying to fasten the trouser button that morning have fled from my mind. Luther hovers before my inner eye, whispering,"Sin boldly!" .... (This is why I avoid malls ...) But I'm facetiously trying to convey how passion among human type personnel clouds the intellect, damages memory, impedes judgment, and weakens the entire apparatus of will. It USES intellective and volitional tools, like memory and imagination, but what I am chiefly remembering is the delight of my mouth and the experience of the wonderful and addictive insulin rush we get when we carb out. You Protestants may mock us "idolatrous" Catholics with our jujus and amulets, but I gotta tell you, my miraculous medal bumping up against my sternum or the little cross I keep in my pocket has more than once reminded me that I can call on Divine assistance and get help remembering that it is better to enter heaven with no tummy at all than with a 44 inch waist and a smile on my lips to go to perdition ... On the other hand, and this is still about passion, I have found that when I am at the range (on a good day) I can send six rounds into the COM of my Q target fairly well when I do so dispassionately. But to send them in FAST, I have to whip up some anger. I have to tense my muscles, and imagine that target is shooting at me. When I'm done, there's a grimace on my face, and i have to calm down a little. So for us humans, passion is energetic, but the energy can work with or against our will and better judgment. For the redeemed I suppose we can look forward to having our "affections" line up with our will. And while we would say God is perfect Will, I take it you would say that God has "feelings", but they are always aligned with His will and responsive to it, and NOT spontaneous or arising from who knows where, as human feelings can be. AM I close?

Close, but not exactly on target.

While it is true that God's feelings are not spontaneous, (since He always knows what is going to occur) the essential issue is that they are never dealing with anything negative on His part.

God never deals with doing something that would be anything less then Perfect.

God's passions come into play in that He loves and in giving happiness to others, has pleasure in doing so.

As for your piece of medal on your chest, the Bible says, 'thy word have I hid in my heart that I may not sin against thee' (Ps.119:11)

That is what keeps you away from sin, God's word.

[HarleyD]

The church lacked the "manpower and resources" to get the Bible to the people, even after Gutenberg? LOL.

Yet they didn't have any problems printing indulgences that a person could buy. Funny how that works.

And they're still struggling with Catholic home Bible studies to this very day while those little cards with devotions to Mary pop up everywhere. They really need to set priorities. Well, maybe they have.

[kosta50]

In the early church we find fundamental forms of heresy which reappear with various modifications almost every subsequent period

Yes, a very nice essay. The heresies are regurgitations with different labels, a fresh crop of chewed up vomit in every generation.

[MHGinTN]

Placemarker porch pause ...

[kosta50]

Kosta: He loves the saved and the condemned equally.

Dr.E: Spoken like a true humanist.

"Love your enemies" (I guess Christ spoke like a real humanist for your taste).

But then there are Paulines and there are Christians...

"If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the LORD shall reward thee." -- Proverbs 25:21-22

"Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head." -- Romans 12:20

Is this something Christ would say?

"The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity." -- Psalm 5:5

Yet He saves them!

"But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity." -- Luke 13:27

And here I was under the impression that our destiny is not work-related, but rather pre-determined before we even existed, let alone sinned.

It all revolves around a correct understanding of justification -- salvation is not due to what we do, but what Christ did

Then your own verse above (Luke 13:27), i.e. "workers of iniquity," makes no sense, especially in view of the fact that the Bible is clear that we will be judged according to what we do (that would be our deeds).

[HarleyD]

You left out one of Augustine's last work that he felt was his best:

For it is not every one who thinks that believes, since many think in order that they may not believe; but everybody who believes, thinks,—both thinks in believing, and believes in thinking. Therefore in what pertains to religion and piety (of which the apostle was speaking), if we are not capable of thinking anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, we are certainly not capable of believing anything as of ourselves, since we cannot do this without thinking; but our sufficiency, by which we begin to believe, is of God. A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints

I know we have had this conversation before, but the Trestise on Predestination was one of Augustine's last writings; one that he came to realize from Cyprian, that there is nothing that you have that you have not received. You received grace, faith, belief, works, everything. It demeans God for someone to say they give something to God when, in fact, God owns everything and give us our belief.

It was not thus that that pious and humble teacher thought—I speak of the most blessed Cyprian—when he said "that we must boast in nothing, since nothing is our own."6 And in order to show this, he appealed to the apostle as a witness, where he said, "For what hast thou that thou hast not received? And if thou hast received it, why boastest thou as if thou hadst not received it?" [1 Cor. 4.7.] And it was chiefly by this testimony that I myself also was convinced when I was in a similar error, thinking that faith whereby we believe on God is not God's gift, but that it is in us from ourselves, and that by it we obtain the gifts of God, whereby we may live temperately and righteously and piously in this world. For I did not think that faith was preceded by God's grace, so that by its means would be given to us what we might profitably ask, except that we could not believe if the proclamation of the truth did not precede; but that we should consent when the gospel was preached to us I thought was our own doing, and came to us from ourselves.

Is faith a gift or is it not? Augustine overlooked this in his other writings.

[HarleyD]

Well, hold the popcorn. It’s 2:17 on the east coast and I’m going to bed. :O)

[kosta50]

Mark to HD: I have been searching for words, phrases and prose of any kind in order to illustrate the theory that John Calvin’s theology is not Christian. You have provided it for me throughout your entire post, and you have summarized it in such a fashion that we shall never forget.

LOL!!!

[MHGinTN]

'But now the righteousness of God is manifest apart from/completely unconnected to the law.'

'therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.'

There will come a where/when that men may be, will be, judged according to their works. But to those in whom there is therefore now condemnation will not be judged in that where/when for they are covered by the Blood Of Christ which cleanseth from ALL unrighteousness. Only after being cleansed under His blood can one walk 'after the spirit'. Such an one will not be then tossed back into a judgment posture before God because that would call to nullification the righteousifying accomplished with Christ's Blood.

Perhaps there are two or more events in Heaven that are being confused in this 'judgmental posture' from some posters? Weddings aren't judgment events, I don't think, anyway. [Now, back up on the porch ...]

[kosta50]

One solution would be to interpret "passion" in the Confession to refer to the weaknesses of passion that humans so often fall into. That would make the most sense to me. One cannot love if one's whole being is dispassionate

Then God is not unchanging, but subject to change (passions, emotions). Nor can He be a perfect (impartial) Judge. Good's "moods" reflect our spiritual state with regard to God. Some are comforted, and others are "burned" by His blessings.

Fire is fire. It can burn you but it can warm you and it can blind you as much as it can show you the way.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

When the Westminster Confession of Faith speaks of God and passions, it is reiterating Scripture which says God is unchangeable. His passions are not like men's passions, subject to whim and unfulfilled desires. God's passions are perfect in and of themselves. They do not change. What He loves, He loves forever. What He hates, He hates forever. God's love does not change.

"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." -- James 1:17

---

"For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." -- Malachi 3:6

I am surprised that you seem to be taking the side of Kosta in this debate, D-fendr. Isn't it your church that celebrates THE PASSION OF CHRIST?

Since you excerpted the WCF, let's see the entire Chapter II...

OF GOD, AND OF THE HOLY TRINITY

I. There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute, working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will, for his own glory, most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him; and withal most just and terrible in his judgments; hating all sin; and who will by no means clear the guilty.

II. God hath all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself; and is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; he is the alone foundation of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom, are all things; and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth. In his sight all things are open and manifest; his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature; so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain. He is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands. To him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience he is pleased to require of them.

III. In the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Kosta, you're talking in riddles. Somehow you're saying God has no passion which would mean God has no love.

But I've read you a hundred times saying -- "God is love."

So you seem to be all over the map here.

A correct understanding would be to say that God has no changeable passions. His passion, like everything else about Him, is immutable, complete and in need of nothing.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Fire is fire. It can burn you but it can warm you and it can blind you as much as it can show you the way.

And every fire will be according to the exact purpose of God in order to accomplish His will.

If God wants us to be comfortably warmed by a fire, we'll be nice and toasty. If God wants a sinner punished for his sins, the terrible heat of that fire will be his eternal destination.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Is this something Christ would say?

"I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them." -- John 17:9-10

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your reply.

God's passions are perfect..

Still your confession says: "without body, parts, or passions," not "with perfect passions" or "without imperfect passions" whatever these terms may mean.

They do not change.What He loves, He loves forever. What He hates, He hates forever.

Either: He hates and loves at the same time - seems a split 'person'? Or what you're describing isn't really a passion in the sense we're using. And still, your confession says..

And if we can say "God is love" can we also say "God is hate" in your view?

I am surprised that you seem to be taking the side of Kosta in this debate, D-fendr.

It's the orthodox side. I think it's pretty much found in of all mainstream Christian theology, Protestant included. The theology I excerpted goes way back and hasn't changed.

[We should sometime discuss how we relate to God as our Father; but, this is different than the theology of the Holy Trinity - this may be what is underneath the confusion here.]

Isn't it your church that celebrates THE PASSION OF CHRIST?

Doesn't yours? And both our theologies say God is without passions. To confuse Christ's passion with this discussion involves an error in Christology and/or the Trinity I believe.

Thanks again very much for your reply and posts...

[HarleyD]

LOL!!!

Agree. That's usually the response someone gives when they can't find anything doctrinally wrong with the argument; "...you have proven my point by posting John Calvin". What a hoot!

Salvation by works is a flawed doctrine from the get-go and constantly condemned by the church. People relying upon their own works will have a very sad awakening. One would have thought after two thousand years we would realize this.

[jo kus]

If the judgment of God was determined by "what man does" then all of us are headed for hell.

Sister, I will respectfully disagree with that statement. You are forgeting God's mercy and Christ's sacrifice does not require that man has to be absolutely perfect. Do you expect your children to be perfect? God doesn't, either. His absolute and perfect justice is satisfied by Christ, so He can grant Mercy to those who are walking in Christ, albeit imperfectly.

Your response merely avoids the obviously problem with your theology - God is not judged, man is. GOD sets the standards, and if He decides to give mercy to men who are not perfect, then you should ACCEPT this Good News, not try to place God under judgment.

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." -- Romans 5:19

Of course - we are MADE righteous. IT doesn't say we have been imputed with justice or righteousness, it doesn't say that Christ covers us, it doesn't say that God pretends we are righteous. It says we are MADE righteous!

WE ARE RIGHTEOUS BECAUSE GOD MADE US SO! Regards