Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?
I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?
“To say this is about the sovereignty of God is to be ignorant of what we disagree on. / Really? Tell that to Arthur Pink who wrote the book, “The Sovereignty of God” which is primarily about predestination and election.”
Well, if Arthur Pink was posting on these boards, I would. I would tell it to any of the communion of predestinationist saints, now called in as witnesses against me. But why?
You are here. You’ve read his book. YOU tell me why it denies God’s sovereignty to allow that God MIGHT have chosen to listen to us. Who are you or Mr Pink to tell God that his will MUST be to save a list of names, instead of calling all to believe?
I’ve been doing a lot of reading, right now primarily in Grudem’s Calvinist based Systematic Theology, since that is what our Sunday School class will be looking at today. And I’ve done a lot more reading, including articles by folks who disagree with Calvin. My free time is pretty much all reading, it seems - so help me out. Provide a summary of Pink’s book, explaining why Calvin gets to determine what God’s will is.
Because when I read scripture, I see from beginning to end where God gives grace to many, both believers and those who reject him. I see countless verses about people rejecting God, when God is confronting them and sending them prophets.
I see lots of verses about resisting God’s grace and the Holy Spirit, and how God gives his grace unequally perhaps, but also how we are responsible to respond to what grace he has given, by revealing himself to us.
I don’t see much about how there are two types of grace - ‘common grace’ to those God plans to condemn, and whom Jesus did NOT die for, and ‘special grace’, for those special people whom God wants to save.
I think it is obvious, and IAW scripture, to say that God bestows differing amounts of grace. The parable of the talents (or moneybags, so to speak) shows God doesn’t give the same revelation to all. And what does Paul say about it?
“14For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.”
Those who are not saved will have no excuse, for God has revealed enough that all should repent...but we don’t.
And why does God give the grace of his revelation differently? Why do some get 10 bags, and others 1?
Like a good PDer, as I assume you are, I end up with “The part that is the mystery, that we do not fully understand, is NOT that God is sovereign and elects whom He will for His own good reasons and not according to our good works, but we do not understand why He elects as He does.”
We are closer in thought than you assume. I would rewrite it as “The part that is the mystery, that we do not fully understand...is why He gives grace in unequal measure, as He does.”
“I’ve given you lots of links, but I’m not sure you’ve ever read any of them.”
I read some of Pink, but I didn’t find it very enlightening. Like many PDs, he tends to assume his argument, or to ignore mine. And I don’t have time to read a whole book by someone that I think is skirting the issue. However, the link from Van Til looks concise enough to merit a full reading, and I’ll try to do so after church. However, today is my 23rd anniversary, so I probably won’t log an enormous amount of computer time today!
“Or are all men equally fallen and none seeks God’s face unless and until God draws them to Him by the persistent, intentional, free guidance of the Holy Spirit?”
That sounds pretty accurate to me. I don’t claim everyone receives the grace of his revelation in equal amounts.
Gruden has a paragraph that should come up for discussion today, where he argues that God gives his ‘special grace’, his ‘irresistible’ grace more frequently to the children of believers than to non-believers, and that we cannot know why this is.
Really? Someone with Christian parents is taught from an early age what God’s will is, and sees their parents living - struggling, at times, but living - the Christian life. God has obviously given them a ton of grace (maybe they need it?) and like the Jews who met Jesus face to face, they have EVERY opportunity...yet sad experience is that even then, given 100 talents, so to speak, many will turn away.
Look at my own example. My conversion started in 2nd grade. As a military brat living in Taiwan in the mid-60s, I went to a school for missionary kids. Chapel every morning. Heard the gospel daily. Back then, I undeservedly lived in an environment very different from now - can you image the howls of protest if military brats overseas had to attend missionary schools, with Baptists teaching them daily about Jesus Christ? By God’s grace, I lived in a place and time that no longer exists, where parents thought nothing about sending their kids to a missionary school. There I first heard the gospel, and asked Jesus to save me, although I flunked citizenship the next half, so I’m sure my second grade teacher thought I was insincere.
But God took me at my word, perhaps. In any case, I had parents who didn’t go to church, but who made sure my sister and I did every week. And 5 years later, I met a group of Christian kids, and I KNEW that whatever they had, I wanted. I didn’t WANT to go on longer living like me. I wanted to live like them!
Pity so many of our religion threads might not cause lurkers to feel that way. But was it my merit? Nope. I didn’t reach for God, but God got in my face. By his grace, I knew I was miserable, and that those other kids were living a different life.
Was that ‘special grace”? Was it ‘prevenient grace”? Or was it God’s grace, and I don’t know why?
I choose door #3.
“The Arminians defense is that men love God and thus they believe.”
Umm...no. Allowing others to present their side isn’t one of your strong points in debate.
Arminian taught “Prevenient grace is divine grace which precedes human decision. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin, prevenient grace allows persons to engage their God-given free will to choose the salvation offered by God in Jesus Christ or to reject that salvific offer. Whereas Augustine held that prevenient grace cannot be resisted, Wesleyan Arminians believe that it enables, but does not ensure, personal acceptance of the gift of salvation.” - wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevenient_grace
I just don’t see anywhere in scripture where God says, “I have two types of grace. Grace A forces you to be damned, and Grace B forces you to be saved.”
I see God’s grace, given in different measure, and responded to differently, for reasons not always apparent to us. But God’s grace always leaves man with no excuse. Many do nothing with the grace they have been given, and they will lose what they already have. Even as Christians, we are warned not to harden our hearts, but to walk in the Spirit.
“Or was Christ’s sacrifice determined, ordained and accomplished through the perfect, predestined will of the Triune God?”
Absolutely!
“Who made the soil fertile and gave it rain and permitted it to bring forth good fruit?”
God. No matter what name one gives to God’s grace, it was God touching Cornelius that prepared him, not the inherent goodness of Cornelius.
Show me where the NT says that making holy images is the same as worshipping "idols, statues, images."
Go ahead and bow, pray, worship your idols.
I'd suggest avoiding saying false things about me.
ANY abuse by ANY clergy is huge and should be judged accordingly.
Did I EVER wonder why you don't belong to any religious establishment? No. It didn't occur to me to wonder. I see a lot of opinions loosely knit together, and when they touch on what I believe and seem to indicate a failure to understand (not agree, just to understand) it I respond.
Yes, it is. However, YOU cannot judge ANY other religion that has done the same as yours because you STILL BELONG to one who has sinned the same.
Matthew 7:3 - And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
His Holiness Pope Benedict will not do as you say because he has no reason to do so.
Join in the smear of Ven. Pius XII? Based on the lies in a KGB-planted play?
Your suggestion is obscene.
The article by the priest claims that priests are Jesus, so much so that they are the mediator between God and man...Now you are saying all the lay people have that same position???
Here are people who tell us to our faces that we deny the priesthood of all believers.
Some Catholics on FR DO deny the priesthood of all believers...And the ones that do not never mean that the lay people are priests in the same way that your ordained priests are, unless you're the exception to the rule...
If I were to believe half of the falsehoods told about us here, my head would explode.
Those alleged falsehoods come from your own people...We don't make stuff up out of thin air...We listen to you guys...We read about you guys...We watch videos and see pictures of your people and pope bowing to Mary...We repeat what you guys tell us and show us...
We'll present the definition of purgatory from one Catholic to another Catholic and the 2nd one will accuse of of lying, trying to divide his church and on and on...
You guys may have unity on who you believe, but you certainly don't have any unity on what you believe...
It is a false link. It links to FR, but there is no source and no Google evidence of the content. It appears that your scholarly skills are as poor as their social skills. You really need to validate your posts rather than running apelike to the keyboard every time you think you have found a gotcha.
The rule of thumb for Religion Forum threads is to lock and not pull because some posters put a lot of effort into their replies which they or other posters or lurkers may want to bookmark for future reference. If the thread is mostly empty, a troll thread, duplicate, etc. it might be pulled.
I will put a note to the mods on the thread you linked to not pull it, since it has been used as an argument here.
It is not. It is all over FR and on your home page. How convenient. The original publication cannot be found and even if it were it would only indicate one errant priest, not the position of the Catholic Church. You are getting more than a little desperate. Jesus would not approve.
I don't see any quotation marks. Is that a quote or are you paraphrasing?
We'll present the definition of purgatory from one Catholic to another Catholic and the 2nd one will accuse of of lying, trying to divide his church and on and on...
And the fault there is yours.
If you want to present the definition of purgatory, cite the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If for instance a quote of mine disagrees with one of Mad Dawg on the definition of purgatory, neither of our definitions is correct except insofar as either or both agree with the Catechism.
Thank you.
You said that, not me. I only challenge the veracity and question why your "link" only links to FR and why no original source of the article can be found...Everyone can connect the dots for themselves. Will we find similar dubious substantiation if we research all of you other substantiative references? Maybe you should change your screen name to Eckleburg and give the PhD back...LOL
As a child I learned the Latin of the Mass and its meanings and for me like hundreds of millions of other Catholics the Mass was not foreign babble, it was a well understood celebration.
Historically, within Christendom there were literally thousands of local languages and dialects, and only a handful were written. Adjacent villages often could not understand each other. Latin was a common language and one in which the meaning of the mass and Scripture could be communicated uniformly to every Christian. The Mass is a celebration, not a teaching event. The role of the local clergy was to teach through the Catechism and the Homilies which was done "off line" in the local language and dialects. Latin was also a protection against the random interpretations and bottom up divisive theology so prevalent in the Protestant communities.
Are you promoting Roman Catholic FReeper infallibility now?
Anyone who opened the missalette (or brought a missal with them) could read the Latin on the left and their own language on the right.
Do you actually mean to imply that Latin was used to conceal what was being said?
Post Vatican II. The loss of the common language within the Church has contributed largely to the liberalization and democratization of the dogma as each community interprets the Catechism and Encyclicals as they see fit. This is exactly the reason the Church maintain Latin as the lingua franca (also a Latin phrase used because its meaning is well established) for so many years.
Post Vatican II. The loss of the common language within the Church has contributed largely to the liberalization and democratization of the dogma as each community interprets the Catechism and Encyclicals as they see fit. This is exactly the reason the Church maintain Latin as the lingua franca (also a Latin phrase used because its meaning is well established) for so many years.
The incidents of sexual misconduct including molestation of children is significantly high among Protestant Clergy than among Catholic clergy. It isn't as widely published because the undermining of the Catholic Church is a key objective of the progressive left.
In the OT, God calls your Holy Images idols and gods...And then you guys go so far as to call these idols and gods, Holy Images...
Paul gives us an example:
Act 19:24 For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen;
Act 19:25 Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.
Act 19:26 Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:
Act 19:27 So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world.
An interesting thing about Diana; she was the moon goddess...Her husband Apollo was the sun god...Lucifer is her brother...Diana was forever a virgin...She was referred to as the Queen of Heaven...
But as we know that God condemned these idols and gods, we now see that Paul as well condemned statues and trinkets made of metal and wood that were used as aids in worship...
Apparently Paul forgot to mentions that these little icons would be ok to use to worship God...Must have slipped his mind...
Whenever I read these verses, I'm reminded of your Eucharist celebration and those people who were raised up as Catholics and those just looking for a religion...
1Co 8:8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
1Co 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak
1Co 8:10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
1Co 8:11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish,
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.