Calvinism for my Catholic siblings

[benidict]

It’s interesting how people who are not a Calvinist tell us Calvinists what we believe. I think Bendicit and you claim to have come from a Calvinist background. That’s a tough one for me to believe, especially since you claim to be an ex-fruit inspector. That is definitely an Arminian distinctive in Protestantism. Most Calvinists were once in Arminiian churches to know what Protestantis tend to believe.

dont know how to convince you brother 2nd. i was raised calvinist. i had to attend catachism classes starting at age 12. we studied the heidelburg catachism. Q: what is my only comfort in life and in death? A: that i am not my own but belong body and soul, to my faithful savior Jesus Christ. i still remember my very first lesson. i reject calvin and calvinism. and i reject protestantism as a viable movement. 30000+ denominations prove that it is a flawed movement based on error. otherwise you would not be so fractured.

 

[graceandglory]

In your site, I did a search of “Catholicism” and found some charming articles by the likes of *The Roman Catholic Controversy *author James White and The Gospel According to Rome by James MacArthur, Jr.

See here

 

[izoid]

Originally Posted by izoid
If you can agree with this you are not a Calvinist. The true Calvinist will say one without works is either “backslidden” or was never truly in the faith. Those that make real professions cannot fall away, if they do not have good works they were never saved. Calvin did not teach that good works have any bearing on our standing before God.

It’s interesting how people who are not a Calvinist tell us Calvinists what we believe. I think Bendicit and you claim to have come from a Calvinist background. That’s a tough one for me to believe, especially since you claim to be an ex-fruit inspector. That is definitely an Arminian distinctive in Protestantism. Most Calvinists were once in Arminiian churches to know what Protestantis tend to believe.

Is there something incorrect with what I said or are you simply throwing stones?

I really don’t care what you think about me, I am not here to convince you of anything. You really do not know what you believe, you only know what your confession says. You throw around terms like Arminianism and have no clear concept of what you are talking about. Believe what you want about me, I know the truth. Calvinism breeds disdain for anyone that believes differently than them, that retched Arminianism and that pope who is leading people to hell. You know that is what many Calvinist churches teach.

 

[izoid]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESTERTONRULES
There is no conflict between James and Paul in Catholic theology.

We need God’s grace to have faith.

Without obedience, ie. good works, our faith will die.

We must endure to reach heaven.

I think I can agree with your posting.

Calvin taught that once saved always saved, it is one of the 5 points of Calvinism. If you believe that you must have good works in order to keep your faith alive, not die, you are not a Calvinist.

If you disagree, tell me why and help us all understand. If you can’t do that, which I have yet to see you do, then do not throw stones.

 

[izoid]

It’s interesting how people who are not a Calvinist tell us Calvinists what we believe. I think Bendicit and you claim to have come from a Calvinist background. That’s a tough one for me to believe, especially since you claim to be an ex-fruit inspector. That is definitely an Arminian distinctive in Protestantism. Most Calvinists were once in Arminiian churches to know what Protestantis tend to believe.

Since you refuse to tell us what YOU believe we gave it a shot. If my post earlier in this thread, #38 I believe, is in anyway incorrect all you need to do is show us where. All you have done so far is post confusing posts that are so off topic that it is impossible to follow you. Please read that post and tell me if it is correct.

You tend to throw a lot of garbage in the pile with no substance behind your thoughts. I for one find it nearly impossible to follow your thinking or to determine what it is that you are really trying to say. I know that I am not nearly as smart as you but I would appreciate it if you would try to do a little better.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Since you refuse to tell us what YOU believe we gave it a shot. If my post earlier in this thread, #38 I believe, is in anyway incorrect all you need to do is show us where. All you have done so far is post confusing posts that are so off topic that it is impossible to follow you. Please read that post and tell me if it is correct.

You tend to throw a lot of garbage in the pile with no substance behind your thoughts. I for one find it nearly impossible to follow your thinking or to determine what it is that you are really trying to say. I know that I am not nearly as smart as you but I would appreciate it if you would try to do a little better.

I’ve beginning to think he’s debating here to win, not to win souls by to feed his ego, whether it be ad hominems against the people who call him into account, ignoring legitimate posts, denying and affirming the opposing or the same doctrine, any charity towards Mormons is an affront to the true gospel, saying he wants ecumenism but is unwilling to discuss, etc. I’m not God but this is the only solution I can think of to how he has acted.

I, too, would like Adam to answer what he believes.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Since you refuse to tell us what YOU believe we gave it a shot. If my post earlier in this thread, #38 I believe, is in anyway incorrect all you need to do is show us where. All you have done so far is post confusing posts that are so off topic that it is impossible to follow you. Please read that post and tell me if it is correct.

You tend to throw a lot of garbage in the pile with no substance behind your thoughts. I for one find it nearly impossible to follow your thinking or to determine what it is that you are really trying to say. I know that I am not nearly as smart as you but I would appreciate it if you would try to do a little better.

Do you understand why you are in my doghouse for one month? This reminder is for all Catholic Answers posters, including myself.

And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will. - Paul

 

[2nd_Adam]

I’ve beginning to think he’s debating here to win, not to win souls by to feed his ego, whether it be ad hominems against the people who call him into account, ignoring legitimate posts, denying and affirming the opposing or the same doctrine, any charity towards Mormons is an affront to the true gospel, saying he wants ecumenism but is unwilling to discuss, etc. I’m not God but this is the only solution I can think of to how he has acted.

I, too, would like Adam to answer what he believes.

In a nutshell, John 3:16 together with 2 Cor 5:21

or adoption through propitiation.

Those are the essentials of what I believe. The rest are secondary issues. If you think about my essentials, they are still the central issues that divide us in doctrine which were the basis of the Protestant Reformation. ECT 1, ECT II and Joint Declaration are steps in the right direction.

 

[izoid]

In a nutshell, John 3:16 together with 2 Cor 5:21

or adoption through propitiation.

Those are the essentials of what I believe. The rest are secondary issues. If you think about my essentials, they are still the central issues that divide us in doctrine which were the basis of the Protestant Reformation. ECT 1, ECT II and Joint Declaration are steps in the right direction.

These are GREAT verses and are a PART of the painting that is salvation. You cannot take a few verses and build an entire theology around them. Take the whole of scripture and work hard to come to a conclusion.

It is clear that any of us can use scripture as a weapon to defend our position. The real challenge is to incorporate those verses that do not support our views into those that do. When this is done, a logical conclusion can be reached.

I love these verses but I fail to see how they support Calvinism.

 

[2nd_Adam]

These are GREAT verses and are a PART of the painting that is salvation. You cannot take a few verses and build an entire theology around them. Take the whole of scripture and work hard to come to a conclusion.

It is clear that any of us can use scripture as a weapon to defend our position. The real challenge is to incorporate those verses that do not support our views into those that do. When this is done, a logical conclusion can be reached.

I love these verses but I fail to see how they support Calvinism.

What’s your view of ECT 1, ECT II and the Joint Declaration on justification?

 

[izoid]

What’s your view of ECT 1, ECT II and the Joint Declaration on justification?

To be honest with you I am not familiar with them. I was never much interested in Ecumenism, I always felt that Catholics were wrong and leading people to hell. I didn’t have time for feel good apologetics. I will read up on them and get back to you.

 

[2nd_Adam]

To be honest with you I am not familiar with them. I was never much interested in Ecumenism, I always felt that Catholics were wrong and leading people to hell. I didn’t have time for feel good apologetics. I will read up on them and get back to you.

Thanks, but I want you to note that JI Packer signed ECT 1 and ECT II. Have you read much of JI Packer’s work such as “Knowing God”. From the Catholic side, PETER KREEFT and others like him signed ECT 1 and ECT II. See my second link on justification by faith by Kreeft.

 

[theogrit]

I love Kreeft’s aplogetics, even while he’s staunchly anti-Calvinistic. C.S. Lewis and Chesterton are excellent reads as well. And I agree that Packer might be a pivotal figure in sorting through our differences.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Thanks, but I want you to note that JI Packer signed ECT 1 and ECT II. Have you read much of JI Packer’s work such as “Knowing God”. From the Catholic side, PETER KREEFT and others like him signed ECT 1 and ECT II. See my second link on justification by faith by Kreeft.

I’d encourage you to the actual book from which your article is from. Kreeft affirms the seven marks of the Church, the errors of sola scripture and sola fide, etc. You might want to read the work within his whole context. Click on your signature and see the book from where your article comes from.

 

[2nd_Adam]

I’d encourage you to the actual book from which your article is from. Kreeft affirms the seven marks of the Church, the errors of sola scripture and sola fide, etc. You might want to read the work within his whole context. Click on your signature and see the book from where your article comes from.

I will try to read it somtime in the distant future. However, I am re-reading Knowing God by JI Packer since he is a signer of ECT 1 and ECT 2. At my age, I read about a page or two before bed before I fall asleep. I copied his view of adoption through propitiation summary of the gospel because I think it was a brilliant truth to embrace, especially in our ecumencial discussion. I wonder if Kreeft would agree with adoption through propitiation too as an ecumencial Catholic? :hug1:

Here’s the Knowing God book:

amazon.com/Knowing-God-J-I-Packer/dp/083081650X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258754472&sr=8-1

 

[wisdomseeker]

Why I consider this to be kindergarten apologetics really has to do with the actual contents of the Scriptures. Most Catholics (IMO) need to study the Scriptures for themselves to find out what’s actually in the Bible, in comparision to making those generic arguments. I want to be challenged by my Catholic siblings in regards to the actual contents of Scripture. We all believe that the Bible is the Word of God.

The Catholic Church is well known for:
spreading the Gospel throughout the world.
Doing works of charity.
teaching the beautitudes.
her authority here on earth.

how about you, what are you known for?

 

[2nd_Adam]

The Catholic Church is well known for:
spreading the Gospel throughout the world.
Doing works of charity.
teaching the beautitudes.
her authority here on earth.

how about you, what are you known for?

Irritating my Catholic siblings on Catholic Answers. So, what is the gospel that the Catholic Church is spreading throughout the world?

 

[wisdomseeker]

Irritating my Catholic siblings on Catholic Answers. So, what is the gospel that the Catholic Church is spreading throughout the world?

Calling you all who are outside the CC to repentence and believe in the Lord and obey all He commanded us to do.

**
O truth, you are present to those who seek your help, and at one and the same time you answer all, though they seek your counsel on different matters. You respond clearly, but not everyone hears clearly. All ask what they wish, but do not always hear the answer they wish. Your best servant is he who is intent not so much on hearing his petition answered, as rather on willing whatever he hears from you.
St Augustine**

 

[mark_a]

This statement:

the Catholic will usually lose the debate since the Catholic Faith rejects the sufficiency of the Scriptures (and the sufficiency of Christ too).

Will in no way mesh with:

Catholics and Protestants worshipping God together

 

[2nd_Adam]

Calling you all who are outside the CC to repentence and believe in the Lord and obey all He commanded us to do.

**
O truth, you are present to those who seek your help, and at one and the same time you answer all, though they seek your counsel on different matters. You respond clearly, but not everyone hears clearly. All ask what they wish, but do not always hear the answer they wish. Your best servant is he who is intent not so much on hearing his petition answered, as rather on willing whatever he hears from you.
St Augustine**

Are you trying to say that I am not united to Christ by being a Protestant?