Who are the Catholics: The Orthodox or The Romanists, or both?

Me

[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?

[xzins]

About "deliberating", I refer you to Blue-Duncan's 6736

Ephesians 1:11 is perhaps the clearest expression of the concept of the sovereignty of God, though there are other verses that teach the sovereignty of God (Ps 115:3; Prov 16:9, 33; Dan 4:34-35). In verse 11 Paul continues the theme of God’s predestining us in Christ for salvation. Paul says that such a marking off of the believer beforehand was done “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will.” The clause beginning with “who” is a relative clause modifying him. According to this verse, believers are predestined to salvation in accord with the purpose of God, and God does all things, including predestining to salvation, according to the counsel of his will. The clause, then, broadens the scope of the verse to speak of God’s sovereign control not only over election to salvation, but over all else.

As to the phrase according to the counsel of his will, the distinction between “counsel” and “will” is that the former involves purpose and deliberation while the latter simply denotes willing. The basic thrust of the phrase is that God chooses after deliberating on the wisest course of action to accomplish his purpose. Thus, this verse refers to a plan resulting from deliberation. This verse, then, indicates that what occurs is foreordained by God, and nothing external to God such as the foreseen actions or merits of God’s creatures determines his choices. God deliberates, chooses and accomplishes all things on the basis of his purposes. How does God accomplish all things? Some are done directly and exclusively by God without use of other agents, but most are accomplished through the agency of others (humans, angels, donkeys, etc.).

Clearly, this verse teaches the absolute sovereignty of God. Just as clearly, with such a notion of sovereignty, there is no room for indeterministic freedom. Given indeterministic freedom, God cannot guarantee that what he decides will be carried out. No matter how much God inclines someone’s will toward what he has chosen, such inclination, on an indeterministic account of freedom, can never be sufficient to produce God’s decreed action. Given indeterminism, there is no way for God to be in control of the world as outlined in Ephesians 1:11

[xzins]

Have you had breakfast?

[Petronski]

omni (all) + scienta (knowledge)

[xzins]

And your coffee?

[P-Marlowe]

Excellent point xzins and BD. I think sometimes we take the Omniscience of God too far and assume that because God is Omniscient that he does not need to put any thought into his actions, that somehow merely by speaking the universe into existence it did not require that God actually DESIGN it or put any thought into it.

God claims it took him six days to create the heavens and the earth. Why so long?

[MarkBsnr]

I had no idea that the good Dr. E. was able to deduce the closely guarded secret that Free Republic is really a Vatican owned and directed website. Do you think that Jim Robinson is a Vatican operative?

I suppose that Jim Cardinal Robinson (secret Vatican agent, diocese of Free Republic) has a ring to it.

[MarkBsnr]

Is there any Jesus in your Christianity?... You must come to Christ for everlasting life - the Church that He created and the Holy Spirit commissioned.

Isn't that an odd question coming from someone who places their faith in the Church?

I place my faith in Christ and in His words and His direction. Your question could only come from somebody who does not believe that the Church created by Christ and commissioned by the Holy Spirit is actually of any value to him.

[Mad Dawg]

God claims it took him six days to create the heavens and the earth. Why so long?

Clearly you've never worked with contractors.

[Mad Dawg]

Omniscience does mean that God knows everything.

Say more, please?

I know that Whitehead would agree, specifically that God does not know the future.

Personally I think that Whitehead's Process and Reality is a tour de force whose only flaw is that it's pretty much a waste of time. It doesn't add much to Christian thought, though it illuminates very well a philosophical cul de sac.

In any event, I promise I am not lurking behind a bush with my knife out. I really would like to know more about your thinking here.

[MarkBsnr]

Oh, btw, this information is from the website YOU, dR e, kindly linked us to.

The good Dr. E. has graciously provided us with yet some more information that the doctrines of Calvinism are no more Christian than are those of the Latter Day Saints. The writings of Calvin, Spurgeon, Pink, et al are worshipped even ahead of their Bible worship. Christ appears to be an insignificant portion of doctrine; His Name is mentioned only; His words are considered secondary or tertiary to Paul's and the various OT writers.

[wagglebee]

Nice try -- the "link" is to a Freerepublic posted thread, which has as reference a link to another FR thread.

There's actually more to it than that. The linked Free Republic thread is actually an anti-Catholic VANITY thread by a poster who was BANNED for being an anti-war moonbat.

[Mad Dawg]

So, they prefer a robot maker to a loving creator?

I can't claim to understand their thinking.

IMHO the whole problem is that they insist on an easily understandable answer to an unfathomable mystery, and they don't appreciate the limitations of language in the theological enterprise.

So I'm just watching. I can't go all the way with the thought on either side, but a lot of thought has gone into the debate.

Personally, I FEEL like I was made for God, and I think so too. I also FEEL like I have to do a lot of work just learning how to live in His saving Love. I'm going to wait to see how the argument comes out.

[Cronos]

Omniscience differs from Predestination. God having omniscience (which HE does) does not mean God Predestines us to hell or not.

[Quix]

99%?
of most Prottys
don't have that much
passion about much of
anything!
LOL!
Sigh.

[Cronos]

Christ appears to be an insignificant portion of Calvinist doctrine; His Name is mentioned only; His words are considered secondary or tertiary to Paul's and the various OT writers.

That's pretty strange considering that Christ IS The Word. The Bible is no more than the means to spread The Word. It is not The Word in it's own.

[Cronos]

There's actually more to it than that. The linked Free Republic thread is actually an anti-Catholic VANITY thread by a poster who was BANNED for being an anti-war moonbat.

Oh, that is sooo funny. Dr. E, you've outdone yourself.

First, as proof, we got your link to an anti-Calvinist website.

Then, we got the "proof" of a "Vatican authorized website" which turned out to be a BLOG (and not an official Vatican one either) with a description of the Legion of Mary

And now, we get a link to a VANITY thread, posted as "proof"!!

[Cronos]

IMHO the whole problem is that they insist on an easily understandable answer to an unfathomable mystery, and they don't appreciate the limitations of language in the theological enterprise.

Exactly -- on many points, I think that the EO idea of saying "Why do you want to try and grasp details of the mystery that is God, just enjoy His presence" makes a lot of sense.

[Cronos]

99%? of most Prottys don't have that much passion about much of anything!

You impugn most Protestants. It all really depends on who and where you're talking about. In N. Europe, it's true -- most Protestant churches are dead. In the US that's true of the ECUSA, ELCA, but not of the TRad Anglican or LCMS or Pentecostals or Baptists.

[Cronos]

For your Bible lesson, from the link you gave us:

9. CALVINISM CANNOT EXPLAIN THE APOSTLE PAUL.

Paul attempted to win the more. “For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more” (1 Cor. 9:19). How can I win more if the number of the elect has been settled from eternity?

Paul’s goal was to “save some.” “To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some: (1 Cor. 9:22). Isn’t the election of the saved already assured without Paul’s help? How could anything he did in his life and ministry have any affect upon the elect?

Paul sacrificed so that men would be saved. “Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved” (1 Cor. 10:33). If election is sovereignly predetermined and irresistible, Paul’s statement makes no sense.

Paul persuaded men. “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences” (2 Cor. 5:11). If Paul were a Calvinist, he would know that the elect don’t need persuading and the non-elect can’t be persuaded!

Paul was willing to go to hell for the unsaved Jews. “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:3). How could a mere man care more about the destiny of the unsaved than God? We are convinced that the cry of Paul’s heart here is merely a mirror of the cry of God’s own heart for all lost sinners.

[Mr Rogers]

“What does God-breathed mean to you? Where does Scripture claim sola?”

God breathed means to me that it is God’s Word - his speech, his meaning...it comes from the mouth of God. I can trust it completely because it comes directly from God.

“There are many that claim that the Scriptures are God. Maybe not in so many words, but they claim that Scriptures are the WORD.”

The scriptures are the Word of God - the expression of who God is in written form. Jesus is the Word of God - the expression of who God is in human form. Of course, Jesus is also God Himself, but I believe ‘word’ is used because words express something. Logos in John carries more meaning, but I think my interpretation is OK at a basic level.

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Logos

SOLA is demonstrated - scripture is repeatedly used as the authority in disputes - a practice the church fathers seem to have followed. And since it comes directly from God, not from men - there were no votes on scripture - we can trust it above what men say.

And a visible church organization IS one of men, and Jesus predicted it would have a mix of saved and unsaved, wheat and tares.

There are no tares in the scripture...

But remember, sola scriptura doesn’t say we cannot use anything else, only that anything else we use falls under the authority of scripture.

“In our baptism, we were sealed by the Holy Spirit.”

Here I, as a Baptist, disagree with Catholic doctrine, and probably Calvin’s doctrine as well. When we are baptized with the Holy Spirit - immersed in Him, giving control to Him (”18And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit” - being filled with the Spirit is like being drunk on Him - He becomes the source of our behavior) - we are sealed.

And when does that happen?

“In him you also, when you heard the word of truth...and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.” - Eph 1

When we hear the truth and believe, we are sealed - our inheritance is guaranteed.

Can we break the covenant on our side? I haven’t studied it enough to have an opinion.