Posted on 06/07/2013 2:33:44 PM PDT by NYer
"Although some features of narcissistic personality disorder may seem like having confidence or strong self-esteem, it's not the same. Narcissistic personality disorder crosses the border of healthy confidence and self-esteem into thinking so highly of yourself that you put yourself on a pedestal. In contrast, people who have healthy confidence and self-esteem don't value themselves more than they value others."
What about Genesis 4:7?
“You do realize that Prior to 1455 it was very expensive to copy Bibles/ books and that most people did not own one. I am sure that you are also aware that at that time the vast majority of the population was illiterate and that the use of Art objects was a good way to convey biblical truths to an illiterate population.”
Your point is fairly historically accurate - though it was the common practice of New Testament churches to devote time to public reading of the Scriptures - books and letters and passages - as they were taught.
“So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” - Apostle Paul Romans 10:17, inspired words of God
Substituting man-made art or idols for the inspired and holy Word of God doesn’t lead to salvation. When it does, you end up with syncretistic religion - as we see throughout the world, particularly cultures that combine catholicism with animism. You see catholics burying statues of saints by their mailboxes to sell their homes. You see the introduction of pagan customs declared to be tradition and equal to God’s Holy Word.
The more important issue is that today we do have God’s Holy Word available abundantly and authoritatively.
COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.
Source: Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Edited with an introduction by Edward Peters, Scolar Press, London, copyright 1980 by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing S. R. Maitland, Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses], London, Rivington, 1832, pp. 192-194.
The Council of Tarragona of 1234, in its second canon:
“No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned lest, be he a cleric or a layman, he be suspected until he is cleared of all suspicion.” (-D. Lortsch, Historie de la Bible en France, 1910, p.14.)
metmom,
It is a sad note in history that the Catholic Church forbid ownership of God’s Holy Word that alone is able to save, when the very mission of every Christian Church is to spread the Gospel of Salvation and mature new believers into active followers of Christ.
After this unholy decree, it was hundreds of years of darkness before Luther came along, pointed out that salvation is via the grace of God alone as a free gift, condemned the selling of indulgences, translated the Bible into the common language, and challenged the Church where it was off track. His message was not well received by the pope at the time, nor the Church at large. Instead of self-reflection, when their authority was challenged, they huddled together and examined the writings not for truth, but for heresy.
When hauled before the Diet of Worms and accused of heresy and admonished to recant, he courageously said, “Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen.”
Was Luther without fault as a man? Absolutely not. He had plenty of abject failurs, as we all do... but God used him to speak to the Catholic Church of his time, just as he used Balaam’s ass to speak corrective words to Balaam. Whatever faults Balaam had, he was wise enough to repent when an ass spoke to him. When the Church failed to repent and take corrective actions to the simple truths Luther put forth, a changed Church arose outside the false institutional church teachings.
Here we are today, discussing many of the same issues on FreeRepublic. I don’t think that any of these issues will be resolved here after hundreds of years.
"Toulouse, France, where a council was held in 1229. And, yes, that council dealt with the Bible. It was organized in reaction to the Albigensian or Catharist heresy, which held that there are two gods and that marriage is evil because all matter (and thus physical flesh) is evil. From this the heretics concluded that fornication could be no sin, and they even encouraged suicide among their members. In order to promulgate their sect, the Albigensians published an inaccurate translation of the Bible in the vernacular language (rather like the Jehovah’s Witnesses of today publishing their severely flawed New World Translation of the Bible, which has been deliberately mistranslated to support the sect’s claims). Had it been an accurate translation, the Church would not have been concerned. Vernacular versions had been appearing for centuries. But what came from the hands of the Albigensians was an adulterated Bible. The bishops at Toulouse forbade the reading of it because it was inaccurate. In this they were caring for their flocks, just as a Protestant minister of today might tell his flock not to read the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation"
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/catholic-inventions
Talk about flame war.
Speaking the truth will not engender a positive reaction among those who hate it.
Amen Sister Testify: Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who it was that should betray him.
Joh 6:65 And he said, For this cause have I said unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it be given unto him of the Father.
Joh 6:66 Upon this many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Joh 6:67 Jesus said therefore unto the twelve, Would ye also go away?
Joh 6:68 Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Who made all the copies of the art objects and how would that be cheaper than the copied books?
Do Catholics ever think through what they believe or are spoon fed?
Sigh, intellectual dishonesty from the protestants again, I wish I could say I am surprised.
Yes the Art objects such as paintings, Statuary, and stained glass do cost money. but just as a photo of a family member that you have conveys a memory of a story of something of importance the art objects do as well. If you see a picture of David slaying Goliath, you relay it to someone that doesn't read or a small child and they can relay it to another person. All with out having a book in front of them. Further as you know some people are visual learners and picture cues work better for them than audio cues, or help to enhance the audio cues.
Does this include the protestant practices of snake handling, priestesses, and homosexual wedding ceremonies? (Baptists: http://www.christiancentury.org/article/2013-01/iowa-baptist-church-open-gay-weddings)
(Methodists: http://www.mindny.org/2011/10/methodist-group-to-perform-gay-weddings/)
(Anglican: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2130668/Male-priests-marry-in-Anglican-churchs-first-gay-wedding.html)
Yews because some of those copies were such poor translations that no one would want them.
Nice try, make sure you get a lovely parting gift.
Religious art was to the illiterate what Scripture is to the literate. The problem that the Reformation had with religious art was it was nearly impossible to reinterpret to support Protestant doctrines. That is why nearly all of it was destroyed by the iconoclasts in Protestant regions. It is why it is still largely reviled by Protestantism today.
Peace be with you
“Religious art was to the illiterate what Scripture is to the literate. The problem that the Reformation had with religious art was it was nearly impossible to reinterpret to support Protestant doctrines. “
I’m pretty sure it had more to do with this:
Exo_20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
“Does this include the protestant practices of snake handling, priestesses, and homosexual wedding ceremonies?”
Admittedly, there are a few hundred snake handlers out there. Fewer each year :-)
All I can say in their defense is at least they have a passage of holy scripture to base their belief upon...
priestesses? Got me there. Most of us don’t allow women to teach men and don’t have individual priests, since we are all called priests in Scripture.
Are you referring to liberal protestant denominations? The shrinking ones? I don’t know much about them.
The larger point is that none of those things, except snake handling, is Biblical. Each of the others contradicts what I advocated.
“Further as you know some people are visual learners and picture cues work better for them than audio cues, or help to enhance the audio cues. “
Really? If this were to be the source of truth, why didn’t the Creator of every person command His Church to make idols and artworks, instead of telling them not to do so...?
“That is why nearly all of it was destroyed by the iconoclasts in Protestant regions. It is why it is still largely reviled by Protestantism today. “
I don’t think that is the reason. Many Protestant groups have Biblical art - stained glass or pictures of Biblical events, etc. I’ve yet to see them adored, kissed touched, prayed to, etc. Those kinds of things are viewed by Protestants as idols that are substituted for God.
“There aren’t any.”
Until there are. All are sinners until they are justified. All seek not until they do. All are dead until they are given life.
Human will exists according to the passage we are discussing. By it we can choose to do something or sometimes merely desire to do something without doing it.
“He has willed the chosen.”
Yes. His will is done. My meaning is that He has not forced our will to change. Nothing in these passage indicates that.
“The chosen do not choose Christ.”
It may be that describing a willing heart as choosing is not correct. The Bible does teach making a choice to serve God, but repentance may be less than a choice and merely a willingness to turn from sin to God.
“Whosoever will may come.” I cannot prove this is a choice, but it is something for which we are held accountable which means is under our control and responsibility.
It is also clear that Christ used figures of speech for emphasis. So He says “he who believes in Me, believes not in Me...” in John 12:44. In context, the gospel demands a response of either faith or unbelief, repentance or hardness of heart.
So, returning to my point, the gospel is for all. The command to repent is to all men everywhere. Those who are disobedient and remain unrepentant do so of their own volition and are thus responsible for their judgment. God has afforded to them an offer of life which they have refused.
But those who hear and repent are granted to believe and be saved. This is a gift from God with no merit on our part.
You argue that the answer to the question of who has resisted His will is no one, but that is not true. Some quit resisting His will and believe. Some continue resisting His will.
Apparently Stephen was not informed on your position on this subject as he proclaimed “you always resist the Holy Spirit” in Acts 7:51. Or what about Christ proclaiming His willingness to save Jerusalem but did not because they were unwilling in Matthew 23:37? Or what about Christ denouncing the lawyers who refused to enter the kingdom and hindered others as in Luke 11:52?
Christ again ties the issue to our will when He said that anyone who is willing to do God’s will recognizes His doctrine is from God in John 7:17?
God’s will is for people to be saved. When people yield or submit their will to His, they are able to receive the message in faith. When people resist the word of God, His Spirit and His grace through continued pride and stubbornness, they cannot believe and do not receive the gift of salvation. If people abide in unbelief they are condemned to hell. If they do not continue in unbelief they are saved.
God did not say He hated Esua before he and Jacob were born. He ordained the older to serve the younger. The hated statement came many years later describing Edom. Does God not love the world? There are many characteristics of God’s love that we could discuss, but the key distinction between the love God has for all and the love He has for the elect is that His love for the elect is eternal. So, in light of eternity His temporal love will seem as hate. Jacob loved one wife more than the other. It describes his loving Leah less as hate even though he actually did love her.
God does choose those who are saved. We are saved by His merits alone. These are given. What is incorrect is the idea that He also elects some for damnation. It is clear from many scriptures that people bring damnation on themselves by refusing God’s will not because He forces His desire upon people so He can send them to hell.
Does God harden men’s hearts? Yes. People harden their own heart by stubborn disobedience when confronted with the truth. When we sin ignorantly we are disobedient. When we learn our action are against God’s commands and do not repent, we are hardening our heart. How does God harden hearts? It is by sending truth to someone who God knows beforehand will refuse to obey.
“There aren’t any.”
Until there are. All are sinners until they are justified. All seek not until they do. All are dead until they are given life.
Human will exists according to the passage we are discussing. By it we can choose to do something or sometimes merely desire to do something without doing it.
“He has willed the chosen.”
Yes. His will is done. My meaning is that He has not forced our will to change. Nothing in these passage indicates that.
“The chosen do not choose Christ.”
It may be that describing a willing heart as choosing is not correct. The Bible does teach making a choice to serve God, but repentance may be less than a choice and merely a willingness to turn from sin to God.
“Whosoever will may come.” I cannot prove this is a choice, but it is something for which we are held accountable which means is under our control and responsibility.
It is also clear that Christ used figures of speech for emphasis. So He says “he who believes in Me, believes not in Me...” in John 12:44. In context, the gospel demands a response of either faith or unbelief, repentance or hardness of heart.
So, returning to my point, the gospel is for all. The command to repent is to all men everywhere. Those who are disobedient and remain unrepentant do so of their own volition and are thus responsible for their judgment. God has afforded to them an offer of life which they have refused.
But those who hear and repent are granted to believe and be saved. This is a gift from God with no merit on our part.
You argue that the answer to the question of who has resisted His will is no one, but that is not true. Some quit resisting His will and believe. Some continue resisting His will.
Apparently Stephen was not informed on your position on this subject as he proclaimed “you always resist the Holy Spirit” in Acts 7:51. Or what about Christ proclaiming His willingness to save Jerusalem but did not because they were unwilling in Matthew 23:37? Or what about Christ denouncing the lawyers who refused to enter the kingdom and hindered others as in Luke 11:52?
Christ again ties the issue to our will when He said that anyone who is willing to do God’s will recognizes His doctrine is from God in John 7:17?
God’s will is for people to be saved. When people yield or submit their will to His, they are able to receive the message in faith. When people resist the word of God, His Spirit and His grace through continued pride and stubbornness, they cannot believe and do not receive the gift of salvation. If people abide in unbelief they are condemned to hell. If they do not continue in unbelief they are saved.
God did not say He hated Esua before he and Jacob were born. He ordained the older to serve the younger. The hated statement came many years later describing Edom. Does God not love the world? There are many characteristics of God’s love that we could discuss, but the key distinction between the love God has for all and the love He has for the elect is that His love for the elect is eternal. So, in light of eternity His temporal love will seem as hate. Jacob loved one wife more than the other. It describes his loving Leah less as hate even though he actually did love her.
God does choose those who are saved. We are saved by His merits alone. These are given. What is incorrect is the idea that He also elects some for damnation. It is clear from many scriptures that people bring damnation on themselves by refusing God’s will not because He forces His desire upon people so He can send them to hell.
Does God harden men’s hearts? Yes. People harden their own heart by stubborn disobedience when confronted with the truth. When we sin ignorantly we are disobedient. When we learn our action are against God’s commands and do not repent, we are hardening our heart. How does God harden hearts? It is by sending truth to someone who God knows beforehand will refuse to obey.
“I truly believe your argument isn’t with me, it’s with Scripture.”
One thing that is very important to distinguish in a debate about what the Bible teaches is to recognize the difference between what the Bible says and our theological interpretations of what it says. Calvin is not scripture. If scripture can be misused and misinterpreted then certainly the falable writings of beleivers can be as well. Theology is useful because it helps us to learn the facts of scripture. But theology must always be subject to correction or clarification by the actual words of the Bible.
It is a given that we both recognize the authority of the scriptures. If not, then we would need to have an altogether different debate as this one would be futile and meaningless.
I am willing to be corrected with scripture and even reason. Unless all participants in such a debate are willing to do so then it is also futile.
“I said the same things about Calvinism for almost 40 years. But short of salvation, the absolute best thing that has ever happened to me was coming to understand the Doctrines of Grace. I’m a radically different man.”
The doctrine of election according to grace is a very liberating and empowering truth of scripture. Whenever I have debated these issues before I always find myself rewarded by the benefits that come from meditating on God’s grace and the truth of the election of the saints. This I do not dispute.
“Based on the authority of Scripture I know that I wasn’t seeking Him and I would never have chosen Him had He not chosen me first...”
That is exactly correct. It is impossible for anyone to choose Him unless and until He chose us. People do seek God, but only after they have been sought for and found by God. People do choose to serve God, but only after and because of His choosing us.
There is a correct understanding of how we choose and at least one incorrect understanding of how we choose. The idea that God forces someone to choose Him defies the meaning of choice. Because God chose, through no obligation to do so, to offer mercy and grace and salvation to mankind, people have the opportunity or possibility to choose Him. (This is not intended to be a complete explanation of how our choice is enabled.) Consider the elect angels as opposed to those that fell. God chose not to offer a plan of salvation and redemption to the Devil and his angels. Was God obligated to offer salvation and forgiveness? No. Can the Devil choose to repent and seek God? No.
The gift of salvation is not offered to mankind in an arbitrary or capricious fashion. God did not randomly select or elect some to salvation, but rather He offered grace on the basis of a specific plan and pattern of His sovereign will with the specific objective of accomplishing His own good pleasure and the revelation of His glory.
We agree, and Paul agrees, that God is just and true. How can God show mercy while also being just and true? We see from scripture that God delights in mercy. It is as if He is looking for an excuse to show mercy and not punish us even when we deserve punishment. However, He is willing to reveal His glory by His fierce wrath if necessary. Even then, it seems He uses His wrath to cause those who see it to seek His mercy.
“For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. “
God’s mercy is His choice, not an obligation or repaying of a debt.
“So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.”
But people do will and do run. A doctrine that claims people do not will or choose is not aligned with what this passage says. What it says is that God’s mercy is not “of him who wills [i.e. the recipient of mercy].” That is, the person who wills does not get any credit for any meritorious contribution.
“For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.”
Again we see God’s sovereign choice, and the basis of His choice being the accomplishment of His glory. We read in Exodus that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, but we also read that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Which is it? The answer is, both. How? God sent His messenger to deliver His word to the ruler. This is what hardened his heart. There are two parts to a person’s heart being hardened: God’s word and an unwilling or unrepentant heart.
You may say that sometimes God’s word results in repentance rather than hardening. That is true. The question is, is this hardening our choice or God’s. The key is to understand that God’s election is based on His foreknowledge. (1 Peter 1:2) So God knew beforehand that Pharaoh would not listen. (Exodus 3:19)
For context consider the alternative. God did something similar to another Pharaoh during the time Joseph was sold as a slave by his brothers and subsequently went to prison because of a false accusation. God warned the king in a dream, and sent Joseph to interpret it. But this king did not harden his heart. The same exact words could be used to describe his response: “for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth” because that is what happened.
Or consider the sovereignty of God in sending Jonah to Nineveh. God knew Jonah would run the opposite direction. He prepared a storm. He prepared a fish. He prepared a vine. He prepared a worm to eat the vine. And, by inference, he prepared the people of Nineveh to respond to the message. Nineveh means “fish town”. They worshipped Dagon, a fish god. Jonah being swallowed and then spit out by a whale probably played a tremendous role in his message being received. This is consistent with what Paul said of Israel’s fall; namely, that through their fall, salvation has come to the Gentiles. God chose Jonah because God knew he would run. God chose Israel because He knew their disobedience would give Him the opportunity to show mercy to the Gentiles, and then to provoke Israel to jealousy so Israel will also be saved as a nation.
I have stated that God’s choosing of us is neither arbitrary nor capricious. He does not choose haphazardly or randomly, but according to a plan. Are there any qualities about us that predisposes His choice? If so, what are they?
“And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord who has enabled me, because He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry, although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. And the grace of our Lord was exceedingly abundant, with faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief. However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him for everlasting life.” (1 Timothy 1:12-16)
We see three characteristics of Paul that were the basis of his being chosen by God: first, he was the chiefest of sinners; second, he was ignorant; and third, he was unbeleiving. God chose him as a murdering persecutor of faithful, godly believers like Stephen. God made him an example to show God’s infinite grace and mercy. God also used Paul’s ignorance and unbelief as an excuse, so to speak, to show mercy to him. Now these three characteristics are not meritorious. They are negatives. They are detrimental.
Likewise, consider what Paul said to the Corinthians about who God chooses. “For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence.”(1 Corinthians 1:26-29) Here again we see characteristics of those who God elects for salvation: unwise, weak, poor, despised. These are things that demonstrate that God gets all of the credit for salvation. It is not on our merit.
“For Your name’s sake, O Lord, Pardon my iniquity, for it is great.” (Psalm 25:11) Jonathan Edwards, who strongly emphasizes the importance of election, comments on this passage, “He pleads the greatness of his sin, and not the smallness of it: he enforces his prayer with this consideration, that his sins are very heinous. But how could he make this a plea for pardon? I answer, Because the greater his iniquity was, the more need he had of pardon. It is as much as if he had said, Pardon mine iniquity, for it is so great that I cannot bear the punishment; my sin is so great that I am in necessity of pardon; my case will be exceedingly miserable, unless thou be pleased to pardon me. He makes use of the greatness of his sin, to enforce his plea for pardon, as a man would make use of the greatness of calamity in begging for relief. When a beggar begs for bread, he will plead the greatness of his poverty and necessity. When a man in distress cries for pity, what more suitable plea can be urged than the extremity of his case? And God allows such a plea as this: for he is moved to mercy towards us by nothing in us, but the miserableness of our case. He doth not pity sinners because they are worthy, but because they need his pity ... Herein doth the glory of grace by the redemption of Christ much consist; namely, in its sufficiency for the pardon of the greatest sinners.”
“Then Peter opened his mouth and said: ‘In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.’” (Acts 10:34-35)
God is a righteous judge. He does not show partiality. He does not choose anyone because of meritorious qualities in us. The opposite is true. He does not help those who help themselves. He helps those who cannot help themselves, those who realize they are totally helpless and undeserving of His mercy.
“For who makes you differ from another? And what do you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?” (1 Corinthians 4:7) God did not choose many wise, rich, beautiful, strong and powerful. But that is not to say He did not choose any. But He chose them in spite of their good qualities rather than because of them.
“But short of salvation, the absolute best thing that has ever happened to me was coming to understand the Doctrines of Grace.”
That’s good. It is equally important to proclaim a gospel which includes that God commands all men, everywhere to repent.
Does your doctrine lead to the conclusion that some are elected to damnation? I return to my earlier point that whoever goes to hell, does so of their own will and own volition. They must accept 100% of the blame. God did everything possible to provide a way for them to not need to go to hell. For fallen angels, no redemption is available. For fallen people, redemption is available to all who are willing to receive it. This does not represent a good-works-based-salvation. It represents a non-meritorious cooperation with God’s work by ceasing from our own.
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.