NO WAIT! WE STILL HAVE 20 SECONDS!
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?
The key phrase here is "obtain for us", this is totally different from saying that she dispenses salvation.
Nuns, on the other hand....
Although there are many protestants who seem to be interested in intelligent discussion, they appear to me to be much less vocal than the "gotcha gamers".
A lot of the websites that are offered as “official Catholic” websites aren’t don’t even belong to people who claim to be Catholic.
amazing. Just when I thought the arguments/proofs couldn’t get any lamer....I guess I learned not to underestimate
Let her anti-Catholic credentials remain unsullied: she did no such thing.
Well, if websites of Vatican approved organizations are filled with crazies, then that sure cuts down on available sources.
Care to link proof of that alleged Vatican approval?
I know exactly what you mean.
Although there are many protestants who seem to be interested in intelligent discussion, they appear to me to be much less vocal than the "gotcha gamers".
There are plenty of them, they tend to avoid these threads and many have privately expressed disgust at how some on these threads act. Free Republic may be one of the few places in America where you can see anti-Catholic bigotry displayed in pure form and I can hardly imagine what we would see if it weren't for the moderators.
NOTHING and I do mean NOTHING will ever top the attempt to pass this website off as a Catholic website:
http://crystalinks.com/
The website belongs to a Jewish psychic from Brooklin named Ellie Crystal. She’s really into UFOs (she’s been “beamed aboard” on and orbitted the Earth) and she “converses” every day with an entity named Zoroaster (she calls the entity “Z” for short).
That is unreal - even for them
Ain't. Ain't. Ain't.
First, there is no period of "deliberation" by God because that would imply there is a moment when God does not know the future, does not ordain the future and/or does not have control of the future. All of which denies the omniscience of God.
Second, the doctrine of election is grounded by the reality of total depravity (total inability.) Unless and until God regenerates the fallen sinner from a natural man to a spiritual man that man will remain lost and condemned in his sins.
So unless and until God acts decisively and personally by giving the free gift of the Holy Spirit, according to God's own purpose, determined from before the foundation of the world, no man can or will choose righteousness.
Therefore it's God who determines which fallen men, all equally fallen and lost in trespass, will receive His grace through saving faith in his Son's work on the cross.
Salvation has absolutely nothing to do with "foreseen" anything. If it did, men would have reason to boast because of what they've done. And so salvation would be according to debt and not free mercy.
Most of us grew up being taught some version of Arminianism. It's the natural inclination of men to want to take credit. Name above the title. But God names his family; we don't. And He names them according to His good pleasure and not as payback for something "good" they freely choose to do.
What could be more clear than 1 Corin. 4:7 and Romans 9:11?
"For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth" -- Romans 9:11"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?" -- 1 Corin. 4:7
Who makes us different from one another? How can a man who is born to a comfortable, American family with love and education and opportunity possibly say he has the same "free will choice to believe" as the wretchedly poor, unloved orphan who's raised on the streets and steals to feed himself?
God made us to differ. And God gives us everything we have, including a repentant heart, a renewed mind, a family, circumstances, disposition, opportunity and a saving faith.
So while God can choose the unfortunate orphan to bring to faith and leave the fortunate son of privilege in his sins, we surely can't be so naive as to think God has treated us equally or made the path to faith the same for all. At its heart, Arminianism is glorification of self and a denial of the real world we live in.
All men are fallen and none, rich or poor, seeks His face unless He first reveals Himself to them. His call alone.
And the man to whom God reveals His Son will be brought to saving faith because God does not lack for anything, and the Holy Spirit does not fail, not ever, if the Trinity is true.
"All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him." -- Luke 10:22
I was around before there was a Religion Moderator. Whatever occasional disagreements I may have with him/her/them (and there are some), it was far worse before. Real malefactors have been banned (and good riddance). The prohibition on "making it personal" has reduced, but far from eliminated, the foulness.
NO WAIT! WE STILL HAVE 20 SECONDS!
bookmark.
"The motherhood of Mary in the order of grace," as the Second Vatican Council explains, "lasts without interruption from the consent which she faithfully gave at the annunciation and which she sustained without hesitation under the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. In fact, being assumed into heaven she has not laid aside this office of salvation but by her manifold intercession she continues to obtain for us the graces of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she takes care of the brethren of her Son who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home."
I haven't see the entirety of the websites in question, and cannot speak to how "official" either of them is, but this quote is quite unobjectionable. In fact something similar, less the reference to the Assumption, can be said of the Church itself, or of any saint. This is what the Church is doing sunset to sunset, obtain for me and you the graces of salvation.
Dr E “Second, the doctrine of election is grounded by the reality of total depravity (total inability.) Unless and until God regenerates the fallen sinner from a natural man to a spiritual man that man will remain lost and condemned in his sins. / So unless and until God acts decisively and personally by giving the free gift of the Holy Spirit, according to God’s own purpose, determined from before the foundation of the world, no man can or will choose righteousness.”
It would be more impressive if you could back that assertion up with scripture. You are not only claiming that all aspects of man has fallen, that there is none righteous and none who seeks God, but that we must be born again before “man can or will choose righteousness”.
I understand your assertion, but you need to support it with God’s revelation.
For we read in Acts, “1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, 2 a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God. 3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God come in and say to him, “Cornelius.” 4And he stared at him in terror and said, “What is it, Lord?” And he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. 5And now send men to Joppa and bring one Simon who is called Peter.”
In verse 44, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they were born again.
Further, Ephesians 1 says, “13In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.”
What is the order again, Dr E?
1) When you heard the word of truth (the gospel)
2) and believed in him,
3) you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.
An Arminian would say God’s prevenient grace had brought them to sufficient knowledge that they could repent, believe, and receive the Holy Spirit.
I would point out God has given at least some revelation to everyone (Rom 1). That is why men are responsible for their actions.
Think of Cain. He was a murdering rebel against God, and yet God spoke to him and warned him of the consequences of sin. Cain rejected God, but he DID interact with God:
“The LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” 8 Cain spoke to Abel his brother. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. 9Then the LORD said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know; am I my brother’s keeper?” - Gen 4
Please explain to me why these men, prior to or without conversion, were able to interact with God, if that is not possible without being born again first.
Dr E “Most of us grew up being taught some version of Arminianism. It’s the natural inclination of men to want to take credit.”
Except that Arminians are NOT taking any credit. None on this side are boasting about what fine fellows we were, or are.
Dr E “But God names his family; we don’t. And He names them according to His good pleasure and not as payback for something “good” they freely choose to do.”
Scripture, please. I can flood you with scripture telling us to repent or else, to believe or else, that we are saved by grace THRU faith.
So where are the scriptures telling us God mad a list of names, and checks them off? That is not election, Dr E!
It COULD be election, if that were the means God chose. Or God COULD chose to save those who believe. Either one COULD fit the verses on election. But only one fits the hundreds of verses about believing.
Please explain these verses:
“30 Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” - Acts 16
Here is what Calvin said (would that he had taught likewise in his systematic theology!):
30. Sirs, what must I do? He doth so ask counsel, that he showeth therewith that he will be obedient. By this we see that he was thoroughly touched, so that he was ready to do what they should command him, whom not many hours before he had bound uncourteously. The wicked oftentimes when they see wonders, though they tremble for a time, yet are they straightway made more obstinate, as it befell Pharaoh, (Exodus 8:8, 32;) at least they are not so tamed that they give over themselves to God. But in this place the keeper (acknowledging the power of God) was not only a little afraid, so that he returned straightway unto his former cruelty, but he showeth himself obedient to God, and desirous of sound and wholesome doctrine. He demandeth how he may obtain salvation; whereby it appeareth more plainly that he was not suddenly taken with some light fear of God only, but truly humbled to offer himself to be a scholar to his ministers. He knew that they were cast in prison for no other cause, save only because they did overthrow the common estate of religion. Now he is ready to hear their doctrine which he had before contemned.
31. Believe in the Lord Jesus. This is but a short, and, to look to, a cold and hungry definition of salvation, and yet it is perfect to believe in Christ. For Christ alone hath all the parts of blessedness and eternal life included in him, which he offereth to us by the gospel; and by faith we receive them, as I have declared, (Acts 15:9.) And here we must note two things; first, that Christ is the mark whereat faith must aim; and, therefore, men’s minds do nothing else but wander when they turn aside from him. Therefore, no marvel if all the divinity of Popery be nothing else but an huge lump and horrible labyrinth; because, neglecting Christ, they flatter themselves in vain and frivolous speculations. [Pot. Kettle.]Secondly, we must note, that after we have embraced Christ by faith, that alone is sufficient to salvation. But the latter member, which Luke addeth by and by, doth better express the nature of faith, Paul and Silas command the keeper of the prison to believe in the Son of God. Do they precisely stay in this voice only? Yea, it followeth in Luke, in the text, that they preached the word of the Lord. Therefore, we see how the faith is not a light or dry opinion concerning unknown things, but a plain and distinct knowledge of Christ conceived out of the gospel. Again, if the preaching of the gospel be absent, there shall no faith remain any longer. To conclude, Luke coupleth faith with preaching and doctrine; and after that he hath briefly spoke of faith, he doth, by way of exposition, show the true and lawful way of believing. Therefore, instead of that invention of entangled faith, whereof the Papists babble, let us hold faith unfolded in the word of God, that it may unfold to us the power of Christ.”
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom37.iv.vi.html
Dr E “What could be more clear than 1 Corin. 4:7 and Romans 9:11?”
Both are clear enough, but they do not support the idea that we must be born again to believe, or that we are saved as names on a list.
1 Corinth 4:7 Paul is defending his ministry, and he writes:
“6 I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another. 7 For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive it? 8 Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! Without us you have become kings! And would that you did reign, so that we might share the rule with you!”
From Barnes:
“Verse 7. For who maketh, etc. This verse contains a reason for what Paul had just said; and the reason is, that all that any of them possessed had been derived from God, and no endowments whatever, which they had, could be laid as the foundation for self-congratulation and boasting. The apostle here doubtless has in his eye the teachers in the church of Corinth, and intends to show them that there was no occasion of pride or to assume pre-eminence. As all that they possessed had been given of God, it could not be the occasion of boasting or self-confidence.”
Truly spoken, and in total accord with Arminian and myself. If God doesn’t seek us, and reach down to us, there is nothing. And God will give to us in different measure, according to his will.
But that doesn’t say we are saved as names on a list, does it...
Romans 9 needs to be read IN CONTEXT. It is addressing, not salvation of individuals, but of the election of Israel as a people chosen to inherit the promise to Abraham.
“10And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
Why did God choose to fulfill the promise thru the line of Jacob rather than Esau? We don’t know. But it is worth remembering that the quote “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated” comes, not from Genesis, but from Malachi (The Italian Prophet, if pronounced the ‘right’ way). It doesn’t address Jacob as an individual, or Esau as an individual, but of the nations they fathered.
So when you take a verse on election here or there in Romans 9-11 and apply it to individual salvation, you are taking it out of context.
Are the Jews still the inheritors of the promise? Even though they have largely rejected Jesus and Gentiles are flooding the church?
Paul answers with a resounding “Yes!” And praise God, he is right! But he is not addressing the salvation of individuals, for he addressed that in Chapter 3:
“21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.”
Dr E “So while God can choose the unfortunate orphan to bring to faith and leave the fortunate son of privilege in his sins, we surely can’t be so naive as to think God has treated us equally or made the path to faith the same for all. At its heart, Arminianism is glorification of self and a denial of the real world we live in.”
Perhaps you should read Jacobus Arminius before pretending to know about it. Arminius (and I) said that God gives his grace in unequal measure, for his own reasons. But as Paul says, all have received enough to be without excuse on Judgment Day.
Yes. And unless one understands God opens up the hearts and mind, a Christian will go crazy trying to figure out what they're doing wrong. I know from personal experience. You preach the gospel. You pray that God will open their heart. And then you carry on knowing that God will work it out for His glory.
It isn't about whether you should have handed out one more tract or use the right type of deodorant.
Hey....what a deal. My check is in the mail. If I press my face to the monitor will you bless me until my anointed hanky arrives?
Wooooooo....I can feel the faith rushing to my face. It feels like static electricity oozing from the monitor. It’s working...it’s working....
Yes and no.
On the one hand, it is the job of the Holy Spirit to convict of sin:
“8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: 9concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; 10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer; 11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.” - John 16
We cannot do it. That is why we are all agreed that God must reveal himself to us.
On the other hand, Paul wrote,”19For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.” - 1 Cor 9
That would indicate that we are to cooperate with God, rather than allowing our sinful laziness or anger or pride to become hindrances.
This author seems to confuse control of creation with the free will of man in my opinion.
I don't see how since the very will of man itself, and to whatever degree it is free (and whenever that is), is part of God's creation. God is in control of all of it.
I say this because God created us “in His image and likeness”...and “breathed into us “the breath of life”...”and man became a living being” We are a reflection of Him, set above all His creation works, the animals, the ground(earth) etc. With this the ability to communicate with Him, not by instinct as with animals but with a mind to reason, and think, and determine in order to make choices...”to eat of the tree of life”...or....”the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” Which was a choice...a matter of ones will or will not. (I will choose this or that, or I’ll not choose this or that.)
Yes, but did God bail at that point? :) Did God create man with a will and then just walk away, or is God active in the happenings in the world? If we agree that God is active, then we have to decide if the will God gave us is capable of being outside of God's control. Warfield is saying that if it is, then God can no longer be God because God would have created something more powerful than Himself. Humans can certainly do that with bombs, etc., but the Biblical God cannot. God cannot say "OH MY SELF - I've created a monster, I can't control it!" :)
Further, Warfield is saying that not only CAN God control us, but that He WILL control us. For if He did not, if He gave away what He alone made, then He could no longer claim that this is HIS universe, etc. It would be some other universe held together by something other than God. Therefore, if God really turned over His control to us, then that would nullify Christianity because the God of the Bible would then not exist.
Further...I certainly do not think of control when I think of God, let alone that I would think there is no God if I’m not controlled. That just seems a senseless statement.
Well, it is probably true that we do not experience God's control in the same way a two-year-old experiences being controlled by a parent, but the truth is that God's control is FAR broader than even that. :) When I think of God's control over me I think of how much He loves me, and how much He is going to take care of me and teach me and keep me from harm. I want all of those things, and if God REALLY does know best then maybe we all should. :)
You've missed the point. We are new creatures that desires to follow God. You either want to do evil or you want to do good. A Christian can do evil things but a unsaved person will never do things that pleases God. That ties in completely with Dr. Calvin's beliefs. Here is an excerpt from Calvin's commentary on Ephesian 2 which speaks directly to this. It is a long read but you need the full text to get to his point in the last paragraph.
Ought we not then to be silent about free-will, and good intentions, and fancied preparations, and merits, and satisfactions? There is none of these which does not claim a share of praise in the salvation of men; so that the praise of grace would not, as Paul shews, remain undiminished. When, on the part of man, the act of receiving salvation is made to consist in faith alone, all other means, on which men are accustomed to rely, are discarded. Faith, then, brings a man empty to God, that he may be filled with the blessings of Christ. And so he adds, not of yourselves; that claiming nothing for themselves, they may acknowledge God alone as the author of their salvation.
9. Not of works. Instead of what he had said, that their salvation is of grace, he now affirms, that “it is the gift of God.” 124 Instead of what he had said, “Not of yourselves,” he now says, “Not of works.” Hence we see, that the apostle leaves nothing to men in procuring salvation. In these three phrases, — not of yourselves, — it is the gift of God, — not of works, — he embraces the substance of his long argument in the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians, that righteousness comes to us from the mercy of God alone, — is offered to us in Christ by the gospel, — and is received by faith alone, without the merit of works.
This passage affords an easy refutation of the idle cavil by which Papists attempt to evade the argument, that we are justified without works. Paul, they tell us, is speaking about ceremonies. But the present question is not confined to one class of works. Nothing can be more clear than this. The whole righteousness of man, which consists in works, — nay, the whole man, and everything that he can call his own, is set aside. We must attend to the contrast between God and man, — between grace and works. Why should God be contrasted with man, if the controversy related to nothing more than ceremonies?
Papists themselves are compelled to own that Paul ascribes to the grace of God the whole glory of our salvation, but endeavor to do away with this admission by another contrivance. This mode of expression, they tell us, is employed, because God bestows the first grace. It is really foolish to imagine that they can succeed in this way, since Paul excludes man and his utmost ability, — not only from the commencement, but throughout, — from the whole work of obtaining salvation.
But it is still more absurd to overlook the apostle’s inference, lest any man should boast. Some room must always remain for man’s boasting, so long as, independently of grace, merits are of any avail. Paul’s doctrine is overthrown, unless the whole praise is rendered to God alone and to his mercy. And here we must advert to a very common error in the interpretation of this passage. Many persons restrict the word gift to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating in other words the former sentiment. His meaning is, not that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God, or, that we obtain it by the gift of God.
10. For we are his work. By setting aside the contrary supposition, he proves his statement, that by grace we are saved, — that we have no remaining works by which we can merit salvation; for all the good works which we possess are the fruit of regeneration. Hence it follows, that works themselves are a part of grace.
When he says, that “we are the work of God,” this does not refer to ordinary creation, by which we are made men. We are declared to be new creatures, because, not by our own power, but by the Spirit of Christ, we have been formed to righteousness. This applies to none but believers. As the descendants of Adam, they were wicked and depraved; but by the grace of Christ, they are spiritually renewed, and become new men. Everything in us, therefore, that is good, is the supernatural gift of God. The context explains his meaning. We are his work, because we have been created, — not in Adam, but in Christ Jesus, — not to every kind of life, but to good works.
What remains now for free-will, if all the good works which proceed from us are acknowledged to have been the gifts of the Spirit of God? Let godly readers weigh carefully the apostle’s words. He does not say that we are assisted by God. He does not say that the will is prepared, and is then left to run by its own strength. He does not say that the power of choosing aright is bestowed upon us, and that we are afterwards left to make our own choice. Such is the idle talk in which those persons who do their utmost to undervalue the grace of God are accustomed to indulge. But the apostle affirms that we are God’s work, and that everything good in us is his creation; by which he means that the whole man is formed by his hand to be good. It is not the mere power of choosing aright, or some indescribable kind of preparation, or even assistance, but the right will itself, which is his workmanship; otherwise Paul’s argument would have no force. He means to prove that man does not in any way procure salvation for himself, but obtains it as a free gift from God. The proof is, that man is nothing but by divine grace. Whoever, then, makes the very smallest claim for man, apart from the grace of God, allows him, to that extent, ability to procure salvation.
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.