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?
Now, what one does or does not do in becoming a Christian seems like the clearest example of “things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation”, and so it ought to be taught clearly enough and with sufficient repetition to ensure “the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.”
Yes, that's right, AND this discussion between Arminianism and Calvinism does not offend this section of the WCF at all. What is that necessary thing that must be believed for salvation? Well, it is that one must believe to be saved, and we all agree on that. You aren't going to hell because you're an Arminian and we're not either for being Calvinists. Scripture is plain enough that faith is required.
What we are arguing about is how that faith comes into being. Who gets the blue ribbon? Is it man for being so wise as to snatch up what is literally the opportunity of a lifetime, or does the blue ribbon go to God for purposely bringing His beloved children unto Himself without risk of losing a single one? If man deserves the blue ribbon, then by definition God doesn't care which of the men won it. He threw away His right to choose. But if God deserves the blue ribbon then we know He cared immeasurably for those He individually saved fully and by His own power alone.
Why would God give us hundreds of verses about believing and having faith, if we are saved by election?
Election is the in/out decision by God. That decision must be implemented by the power of God. That predestination includes the happening of faith within time. So, we would expect many verses talking about believing and faith in His communications to us. The elect WILL believe so all information we can get about that is useful to the elect.
If faith and belief are gifts he gives to those on his list, why doesn’t he say so?
We say He does say so and you disagree, which is fine.
Hey, it is late, a couple Heinekens, fat fingers, no typing skill, I will get it, it is now just a question of how many prairie dogs die until I do.
“What do I have that has not been given to me by God?”
A sinful nature prone to sin.
RnMom: The Day of atonement was a day of repentance and forgiveness for the Jewish people..it was a type of Christ as high priest and a type of Christ as sacrifice . The sacrifice was solely for the elect nation of Israel it was not an unlimited atonement it was limited to Gods chosen people... We have a God that does not change
Yes, exactly. And just in other common sense terms we have:
Jesus will not pray for the world but only for His children, for they are not of the world. How can we say that Christ died for the world when He won't even pray for the world? That wouldn't make any sense.
Why thank you, Dr. E. But you're right I didn't think of no internet. You know what, I've just decided I'm not going to run. I need to spend more time with my family. :)
That is tautology.
How is that tautology? My post distinguishes between election and predestination, but acknowledges that they go hand in hand. What is your criticism?
Which part of
“This term ‘________________’ is extremely blaphemous, offensive, outrageous in its connotations and implications.”
is difficult for them to understand?
Oh, right, it’s not about understanding, it’s about DEMANDING kowtowing compliance.
Sigh.
Jesus will not pray for the world but only for His children, for they are not of the world. How can we say that Christ died for the world when He won’t even pray for the world?
Jesus said...My prayer is not for them alone. I pray for those who will believe in me.....John 17:20 Meaning those who aren’t his children...All future believers were included in that prayer...
You can't have it both ways either! You start off with "the rest of", then you state "To God alone the glory".
If the glory was to God alone, as it should be, there would be no need for "the rest of".
People sin because they are carried away by their own lusts. They don’t sin because of making right decisions. Sin is driven by emotions, not knowledge.
Knowledge = Right “decisions” = Not sinning
Emotions = Being “carried away” = Sinning
So it seems what these equations say is one uses their mind, to not sin. And emotions to sin.
But the heart (the seat of the emotions) and the mind are both entertwined when we are saved......
“If you confess with your mouth,...... ( a decision/thought, sometimes referred as a decision for Christ.) “Jesus is Lord.......
and BELIEVE WITH YOUR HEART....(seat of emotion) that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” Romans 9:10
How on earth does that imply the trinity?
Then everything else comes from the Father including your faith? Be careful what you agree to. ;O)
“What we are arguing about is how that faith comes into being. Who gets the blue ribbon? Is it man for being so wise as to snatch up what is literally the opportunity of a lifetime, or does the blue ribbon go to God for purposely bringing His beloved children unto Himself without risk of losing a single one?”
I would argue we are really talking bout believing, not faith. When one believes another, we call it faith. Faith is created by believing in another person or thing.
I believe, as you quoted, that scripture is meant to enlighten, not obscure. So when we find, “What must I do to be saved?”, and the reply is “Nothing. God will give you belief if you are...”, I believe Calvin is right and belief is given to us as a result of salvation.
But since I read, “Believe, and you will be saved”, and since Jesus commands belief, and rebukes the lack thereof, then the clear teaching of the passage is that belief is what we do.
When Jesus says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.”, I take it the way the language implies.
And when we read “And behold, some people brought to him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.”, I take it for what it very clearly says - forgiveness follows faith, and “According to your faith be it done to you.”
If Jesus spoke like this and predestination as taught by Calvin is true, then Jesus was dishonest.
FK “If man deserves the blue ribbon, then by definition God doesn’t care which of the men won it. He threw away His right to choose.”
If God tells us “Whosoever believes”, then that is his choice. Most passages on election don’t discuss HOW one becomes elect, only what God has planned for the elect. And since God repeatedly says whosoever believes, that is obviously his means of choosing. Yes, God gives up his right to elect by individual names. However, IF God elects by individual names, then why does he say “whosoever”?
When he chose Israel, he didn’t say, “Any nation that does XYZ”. Instead he says “Not because of anything you do...” That was honest.
FK “The elect WILL believe so all information we can get about that is useful to the elect.”
Except it never says, ‘If you are elect, you will be given belief’. And it repeatedly says, “If you believe...” Why would anyone chose to interpret scripture by what it DOESN’T say, instead of by what it DOES?
FK “We say He does say so and you disagree, which is fine.”
Where? He repeatedly and explicitly states that believing is what we are required to do. So where does he state it is a gift?
Salvation is a gift, because he chooses to save us apart from our works. Salvation is more than a gift, for he gives it to those not seeking him. He provides the revelation. We respond with repentance, or further rebellion. Deserving nothing, we are given everything. Refusing what we are given, we lose even that. Real choice.
“21But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23for 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, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.” - Romans 3
“the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all he elects”
No, “the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe”. An unlimited offer. Conditional acceptance. At least, that is the plain meaning. The way Luther’s milkmaid would read it.
God’s grace is the gift. Explicit.
I don't see how that follows.
Mary is a creature. Ab initio creatures are essentially (and "naturally") different from the Creator. Sinless or not, she is still a creature.
If we are going to say that sin is a necessary aspect of creatureliness, so that to be without sin is to be Divine, then we vitiate the Fall story, I think, and change the meaning of God's frequent assessment of His work as "good" and "very good."
Further the saints in heaven are, I imagine, sinless. That does not make them divine.
So it does not follow the being preserved from sin at the moment of her conception (as we hold) makes her any less of a creature or any more divine.
To be my usual fatuous self, I can imagine the famous and oft parodied "I found you in the gutter, and I took you, and molder you, and made you a STAR!" line, and apply it to Mary. She is a sign of the great things God can do and will do when He starts with a human type personnel.
Leaving aside the good or bad reasons for what we hold, it's spinning our wheels to suggest carelessly that we hold what we do NOT hold. We teach that Mary is an eschatological sign. In her are "currently" fulfilled what all the blessed may hope to enjoy. It says that because we see Him we shall be LIKE Him. I do not think that means that our creatureliness will be totally negated.
We say "Mother of God," with the Fathers of Ephesus and Chalcedon.
They invent new meanings contrary to both ancient and modern understandings of what a mother is and does, and attribute them to us, and then attack us because they think their inventions stick to us.
It's bizarre.
But a very large group of people have repeatedly and falsely claimed that WE think, teach, state, insinuate, AND imply that Mary was anything but a creature.
As I have been explaining to my Dominican homies about my apostolate here: It's not so much a matter of defending our beliefs as it is a matter of clarifying them. We are told with a ludicrous solemnity and a risible certainly that we believe what we simply do not believe and never thought of believing. And when we try to clarify we are accused of parsing, of picking nits, of using a rubber dictionary.
Our opponents think their limited and uninformed view is the only possible view. Thus we are presented with unScriptural implications that to be sinless is to be of Divine nature!
I suppose one reason not to do the work of understanding what we teach is that it might make it less amusing to mock us for what we believe.
But be of good cheer. He has overcome the world.
Doctoral thesis on the horizon: To deny the title Theotokos or "Mother of God" sooner or later requires a misunderstanding of both ancient and modern understandings of what a mother contributes to her child.
In the carol "Once in Royal David's City" we sing:
Mary was that mother mild,This may be why the custom of carol-singing fell out of favor ....["was NOT!," say the Protestants]Jesus Christ, her little child.["was NOT!," say the Protestants]
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.