There are four gospel accounts consisting of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The gospel of John is the most doctrinal of the four accounts. In addition, the gospel of John is the most Calvinistic book in all the Bible.
I think you should study the words of Jesus on these issues.so would that make james the most arminian?There are four gospel accounts consisting of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The gospel of John is the most doctrinal of the four accounts. In addition, the gospel of John is the most Calvinistic book in all the Bible.
i havent had this much fun in a long time my friend.dont worry stephen. paul did teach what the other apostles taught. and it was not calvinism. 1rst corinthians 15:1-2 Now i make known unto you,brethren,the gospel which i
You do know that Peter was quite the Calvinist too. Do I have to post his Calvinism, or can you please do it. Actually, Peter preached double predestination according to his Epistles.so would that make james the most arminian?
ok, like in 2nd peter 2 vs 20 thru 22?You do know that Peter was quite the Calvinist too. Do I have to post his Calvinism, or can you please do it. Actually, Peter preached double predestination according to his Epistles.
1 Peter 1ok, like in 2nd peter 2 vs 20 thru 22? may be awhile before i can respond to your next post. gotta go to work. you have a blessed day my friend
Actually, James rejected the free will of man; therefore, he is more of a Calvinist than you think.so would that make james the most arminian?
Well, that is certainly an inspiring and encouraging invitation to dialogue.
Really? where do you find this hermeutical principle in Scripture?
I agree with both of these points, however, there is another point that is equally important. That is the Word of God committed to the Church by the Apostles. You see, it is difficult to have these discussions because Catholics have received something that our Sola Scriptura brethren deny exists.
Here is another reason that such discussions are difficult. You see our modern evangelical brethren have developed their docrines by extrapolating them from the NT. Catholics received the doctrines of teh faith from the Apostles, prior t a word of the NT ever being written. Therefore, this modern innovation of “biblical doctrine” (in separation from the Apostolic Succession) is a fabrication of the Reformation.
In addition to the fallacy of “biblical doctrine” mentioned here as required, we also have a difference of understanding about the “proper context” of Scripture. You see, Catholics understand that the context of the NT is the Catholic Church. It was completely created, protected, canonized and promulgated within that context. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic and it cannot be properly understood outside of the context of the Catholic Church.
There are two more problems mentioned here. One is that there is such a thing as agreement on “essential issues”. The other is that it is a requirement to “stay within the Scriptures”. This is an artificial and from a Catholic point of view, inappropriate restriction. The Apostles taught that their teaching should never be separated from the Scriptures, nor the Scriptures from the teachings. It is this inappropriate separation that has caused the plethora of division we see in Christendom today.
This verse hardly proves that James rejected free will.Actually, James rejected the free will of man; therefore, he is more of a Calvinist than you think.
Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin. - James 4
I disagree. There are many Protestants that don’t know the history of their own scriptures. They don’t realize that the canon itself is extrabiblical. History bears undeniable witness to this extrabiblical truth. Then there is the undeniable fact that the Word of God was alive and well in the Church prior to a word of the NT being written. This Word of God, which Jesus promised to protect and preserve, did not just suddenly vanish because some of it was written down.
It seems that your ground rules are that you require us to operate from the same errors upon which your doctrines are based.
I can see your point, but since Catholic doctrine is not derived this way, this is not a problem for us. When we read Scripture, we see in it the Teachings of the Apostles reflected.
I certainly hope that all Catholics will be spared the pain of going astray into what our Reformed brethren call “biblical doctrine”. A Catholic who takes up the practice of extrapolating doctrine from the pages in separation from the teachings of the Apostles preserved in the Church will soon fall away from their faith. I can bear personal witness to this fact.
I will certainly concede that most Catholics are poorly catechized and not familiar with their scriptures. However, that is not a good reason to fall into more errors! It should be corrected, but not by adopting practices that will eventually cause problems of their own.
More Calvinisn from Peter…
We all know that Catholics cannot debate Protestants with Scripture alone and win the debate. But did you read the link to the OP? Catholics need to read their Bibles.I
It seems that your ground rules are that you require us to operate from the same errors upon which your doctrines are based.
I certainly hope that all Catholics will be spared the pain of going astray into what our Reformed brethren call “biblical doctrine”. A Catholic who takes up the practice of extrapolating doctrine from the pages in separation from the teachings of the Apostles preserved in the Church will soon fall away from their faith. I can bear personal witness to this fact.
I will certainly concede that most Catholics are poorly catechized and not familiar with their scriptures. However, that is not a good reason to fall into more errors! It should be corrected, but not by adopting practices that will eventually cause problems of their own.
:coffeeread::juggle:I know this was not directed to me, but I would like to note that non-Catholics are quite able to interpret scripture in isolation from the Apostolic Succession. In fact, the plethora and creativity of these private interpretations seem to exponentiate every generation. I have witnessed a vast array of fanciful and creative interpretations that completely overshadow anything done by Catholics.
That’s a distortion my brother. Historic Protestants share common interpertations with the Catholic Faith in most of the major doctrines of the orthodox Christian Faith. We even share the same early church creeds too. The major division really is about our understanding of justification. It sure seems that the Catholic Faith has moved toward a classical Protesant theology of justification by faith. Do you reject penal substutuion, or a forensic justification?I know this was not directed to me, but I would like to note that non-Catholics are quite able to interpret scripture in isolation from the Apostolic Succession. In fact, the plethora and creativity of these private interpretations seem to exponentiate every generation. I have witnessed a vast array of fanciful and creative interpretations that completely overshadow anything done by Catholics.
FALSE.
FALSE.
You don’t want to take the Catholic challenge as stated by the Catholic article in debating with Protestants in the Scriptures, correct?
The door is open to debate our differences in regards to justification by faith within a forensic justification, or penal substitution. Or, we can debate Calvinism through the Scriptures too. The strength of confessional Protestantism is the Scriptures. The strength of the Catholic Faith is Sacred Tradition, but not Sacred Scripture alone.I don’t understand this question, but I think it is off topic in this thread anyway. Apostolic succession is the passing on of the gifts and authority God gave to the Apostles to those who succeeded them, beginning with Matthias replacing Judas. Apostolic succession was well underway before any Scripture was written. Paul ordained Timothy and Titus as bishops before he wrote letters to them.
No. Jesus Christ is the pinnacle of God’s revelation to mankind. Scripture reflects this revelation, as does the Church.