G
GaryTaylor
Guest
1 Tim 1 I agree, so you would say faith is intact but not of use?
- Status
C
Christian_Unity
Guest
The strength of Reformed Doctrine is Sacred Scripture. What is written is written. The only way you can refute the essential Reformed doctrines such as faith alone, forensic justification, predestination, 5 solas of the Protestant reformation is to go outside the Scriptures to make any kind of intelligent debate on the issues. We can continue if you want to. However, I’m not interested to debate Apostolic Succession over sola scriptura because that would reduce the strength of Reformed theology which again is Sacred Scripture. Do you want to debate these issues with the Sacred Scriptures and let the chips fall where they may? The Apostolic Faith in which was once for all delivered in the Saints in found in Sacred Scripture alone.CU,
I appreciate that you believe that this is more significant than the pot thread. Realize that I have as much understanding and ability to discuss this as in the pot thread. Realize that there are others that understand this as well if not better too. Understand that I have no idea what you are talking about as you have not answered the questions I posed.
Understand that Reformed Doctrine dropped out of the Sky based on Renegade Catholics…no Church…no prior history of this teaching…the Catholic teaching at Trent is the same teaching that represents the deposit of Faith of the Apostles…
your turn…
C
Christian_Unity
Guest
Here’s a Reformed understanding of regeneration:
monergism.com/directory/link_category/Regeneration/
monergism.com/directory/link_category/Regeneration/
C
CopticChristian
Guest
CU,Here’s a Reformed understanding of regeneration:
monergism.com/directory/link_category/Regeneration/
So you want to debate the Reformed view of regeneration or as I understand it Calvinism.
This was debated at the Synod of Dort where those that disagreed with Calvinists were declared to be remonstrants or heretics…and thus was born Arminianism and to this day there has been no other synod to reverse this declaration of heresy.
Now if you go back to that thread I presented, you will find, at around post #40…a Lutheran saying the following.
So what you have is debate amongst Protestants that both views are heretical.
In time Calvinism is not the predominant view of regeneration and if you view the world of Protestant thought, using the Bible alone…what is written is what is written…you have two views.
Calvinism in essence represents the minority report based on its propogation commencing 500 years ago. It has been refuted by many.
You want to debate? You mean you want to prove why you believe this nonsense.
You failed to answer my questions?
Answer this question. Have you read…Moby Dick?
C
Carlan
Guest
There are so many different groups of Protestant denominations, how can they know the complete Truth if they all differ on what is true. It seems to me that it all must add up to false security, they all believe they are right,all listening to their own individual denomination leader or founder(their own Pope so to speak.Why stop at the reformation, search back to the beginning of Christ’s Church, why take the man lawyer’s speak for it all.Going way back to Jesus and the commission he gave to the Apostles is to stop being Protestant.
Sorry if I have offended sensibilities but their is only one truth.
Peace, Carlan
C
Christian_Unity
Guest
I guess by your response that you have no desire to discuss and debate Christian doctrine according to the Scriptures alone. Until you are willing to do that, the rest of the comments that you seem to make are simply a dog and pony show.
C
Christian_Unity
Guest
Sorry brother, until you are willing to discuss Christian doctrine through the Scriptures, your comments are just a dog and pony show too. I think everyone here has read the typical Catholic apologetics 101 responses numerous times. No offense is intended, but the truth is found in the Word of God.
Why stop at the reformation, search back to the beginning of Christ’s Church, why take the man lawyer’s speak for it all.Going way back to Jesus and the commission he gave to the Apostles is to stop being Protestant.
Sorry if I have offended sensibilities but their is only one truth.
Peace, Carlan
P
PRmerger
Guest
This is very Catholic of you to say, CU.
We just don’t believe that the Word of God is contained to the Scriptures alone.
Indeed, Scripture never claims this honor for itself. :nope:
C
Christian_Unity
Guest
Hi sister in Christ,
When you want to discuss the actual contents of scripture to determine Christian doctrine, please let me know. We have much in common, but in the area of a forensic justification, we can explore together what God reveals through the Scriptures if you are willing.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Why should it be contained to Scripture alone?
But iif you’re wanting me to quote Scripture, how about this:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 10:16[/BIBLEDRB]
C
CopticChristian
Guest
CU,
I have spent the last several weeks forming my conscience. I have listened to the US Catechism for Adults, 16 discs, about my 4th time through and I am beginning to understand the deposit of Faith so much more.
I have listened to the Confessions of St. Augustine…since as a sinner he is such an example of what can be done when someone turns from sin.
I have listened to Abandonment to Divine Providince as it echoes the truths of Veritatis Splendor. It was written to Nuns in cloister to aid them in their spiritual walk…
I have listened to The Imitation of Christ and find that this is a marvelous and humbling work…
I found a site that lists the greates 100 Catholic movies and I have made some of them favorites on my Netflix que…
In consideration of your OP…and your recent postings…based on all that I have previously said here…I question your intentions in posting…
You came to a CAF and asked for a view…now you want to debate what you believe “Scripture” says…
God calls…you respond…and you respond regularly…and you were called to a Catholic forum…and here you find yourself…what is it you truly want?
P.S. these are all available, with the exception of the Catechism, online free…I am planning on listening to Dark Night of the Soul, watching the Passion of the Christ and other movies to aid my calling…I suggest you start listening to what is being said to you…
C
CopticChristian
Guest
GT,
Chrysostom does a reasonable job of providing understanding here and points out that Job was delivered to Satan as well. I would say that the Faith is dormant and not producing the effects that the gift was provided for…
Faith/Hope/Charity…in my recent studies do not act independently but jointly and according to how God chooses to have them work in us…it is possible that when Faith is weak…Hope gets stronger…and it may be that Hope delivers those that shipwreck back to life…towards Charity or love or by love of God…
newadvent.org/fathers/230605.htm
K
KathleenGee
Guest
CU, I have never heard of forensic justification until you created the thread.
Christ is the atonement for sin. But just because we now believe in Christ, does not mean we are now perfect.
By perfect, I mean that we no longer sin. So how do you explain this inclination to sin…the just man sins 7 times a day.
We have the ongoing war between spirit vs flesh, and Christ is very clear that only those who do the will of the Father, who pick up their cross, and follow Him…until the end will gain eternal life.
So on Christ’s part, yes, He died for the atonement of sin. But Christians continue to sin.
This reality brings me to the sacraments…to the Tree of Life in Genesis…the image of to gain divinity…one must eat from the tree for nourishment…why must one continue to eat to be strong and united with the Divine?
I think the answer is in the living out of the Catholic faith…Word and sacraments and being faithful to God in seeking His will to the end of our lives, and then to wait for Him trusting in His mercy, as only Christ can make us righteous before the Father.
Christ is the atonement for sin. But just because we now believe in Christ, does not mean we are now perfect.
By perfect, I mean that we no longer sin. So how do you explain this inclination to sin…the just man sins 7 times a day.
We have the ongoing war between spirit vs flesh, and Christ is very clear that only those who do the will of the Father, who pick up their cross, and follow Him…until the end will gain eternal life.
So on Christ’s part, yes, He died for the atonement of sin. But Christians continue to sin.
This reality brings me to the sacraments…to the Tree of Life in Genesis…the image of to gain divinity…one must eat from the tree for nourishment…why must one continue to eat to be strong and united with the Divine?
I think the answer is in the living out of the Catholic faith…Word and sacraments and being faithful to God in seeking His will to the end of our lives, and then to wait for Him trusting in His mercy, as only Christ can make us righteous before the Father.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
KG,
Scott Hahn discusses this in his Bible study on the Book of Romans…pointing out how many Protestants take Romans 2…Plan A…Romans 3 Plan B…we can’t do the law, Jesus does it for us…the Catholic view is that Romans 2/3 are two ways of saying the same thing.
It is a view that makes no sense. Hahn points out that the Roman Courtroom is the language of Forensic Justification where we are declared Righteous before God…and that the Roman Courtroom is never alluded to in the book of Romans…Hahn points out that the language is Covenant, family language…and to try to make forensic justification make sense the book of Romans is twisted to mean things that make no sense.
If you want to hear about it listen to Scott Hahn in his Bible study on the Book of Romans…I previously directed attention to this thread…and the following post comes from that thread…
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=589688
Paul says in Romans:
And the same greek word is used as translated made righteous, katestathēsan. So the Protestant is saying that we are sinners by Adam but by Christ we are only declared righteous not actually righteous. This suggests that Adam did not declare us sinners, his act made us sinners and Christ who can do anything only declares us righteuos, according to the Protestant, but cannot make us actually righteous. We only look righteous.
This does not appear to be what Paul is saying. Made sinners. Made righteous.
P
PRmerger
Guest
And this view makes God unable to see truth.
The Catholic God sees his creation as it really is. He is not “fooled” into thinking that someone who is depraved is actually righteous. Rather, he sees us as righteous because we truly are made righteous.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
PR,
Yes, according to 1John and Issaih…this is what we see…
If we are called to be children, we are children, and if we are made sinners by Adam, we are made righteous by Christ…because…
what God says He can and Will do…will be accomplished…
Forensically, by no means, because by one man we were made sinners and by one man we were made righteous…and we are…
on our own, by our works…by no means because it is a work of God from start to finish, for on our own we can do nothing…by grace, through Faith…working in love…a gift…unmerited…
What a Father…wow…
G
guanophore
Guest
Yes. NOthing unclean can enter heaven.
But why do you think that holiness is not possible? It seems that you find God’s grace lacking, or are you saying that the sinfulness of man is more powerful than the grace of God?
Sin is not part of God’s creation for man. It is not natural to man, but an intrusion upon His creation. He has created us for Himself, for Holiness, for His own glory. None of His purpose for us is served by sin.
How is the Holy Spirit too ‘weak’ to enable us to fulfill His command of obedience? Why do you think God commands that which He will not enable us to do?
His word affirms that human beings can, and do, exist in a state of righetousness before God, in complete obedience.
Gen 6:9
9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God.
Job 1:1-2
1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God, and turned away from evil.
Dan 6:21-22
21 Then Daniel said to the king, “O king, live for ever! 22 My God sent his angel and shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not hurt me, because I was found blameless before him; and also before you, O king, I have done no wrong.”
Luke 1:5-7
5 In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari’ah, of the division of Abi’jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
I think we will agree that no one can be in right relationship with God when sin separates them from Him. I contend that all these holy souls were blameless by grace, through faith. It is possible to live a life on earth without sin.
I think you are taking this verse out of context, and if you go back and read the psalm from which it is taken it will be clear to you that the unrighteous are being compared to the righteous. The Apostle uses this scripture to support his point that the Jews are no better off than the Gentiles. He is not invalidating the rest of the Holy Scriptures that affirm that there are those who are blameless and righteous before God. Scripture cannot contradict itself, so if you are interpreting this verse properly, then you have to find a way to explain away all the other verses that refer to those who are righteous before God.
The Aposltes taught similarly, except that they taught that the justification was more than just a “declaration” but an ACTUAL creation of a state of blamelessness before God. That is why they referred to baptims as sanctifying. It MAKES a person holy and righteous before God.
P
pablope
Guest
CU…first, if you really want to discuss with catholics…and if you want to go by Scripture alone…first you have to prove where it says the Scripture alone is the source of truth…the sole rule of faith…where does the Scripture say it is the only thing to use.
Besides…maybe you do not realize it…you are using a catholic book to prove your beliefs…and you do not realize it…that you are using your own interpretation using the tradition of your protestant grandfathers…
Why don’t you read this article first…calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/
I will quote this…and see if this describes your method of interpretation…it is quite an eye opener…:
He adopts a pick-and-choose approach. This approach attempts to avoid the dilemma raised above by methodologically, though not explicitly, counting as ‘traditional’ [as in “traditional Christian orthodoxy”] only whatever the Church said and did that agrees with or is at least compatible with one’s own interpretation of Scripture. ‘Tradition’ becomes whatever one agrees with in the history of the Church, such as the Nicene Creed or Chalcedonian Christology.
This pick-and-choose approach to the tradition shows that it is not the fact that an Ecumenical Council declared something definitively that makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler. What makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler is that it agrees with his interpretation of Scripture. If he encounters something in the tradition that seems extra-biblical or opposed to Scripture he rejects it. For that reason, tradition does not authoritatively guide his interpretation. His interpretation picks out what counts as tradition, and then this tradition informs his interpretation.
G
guanophore
Guest
Without question.
Yes the doctrine does hang together consistently with itself, even if it does not with Scripture or the Teachings of the Apostles.
These are, in fact, the most important questions. And they were all answered by Jesus through His Aposltes, and the answers are quite different than the notions proposed by Calvin in many cases. Calvin redefines the meanigs of the words, something that is reminiscient of the Gnostics in the second century.
Calvin’s ideas about the nature of man, and the nature of sin, represent significant departures from the Apostolic faith. One of those departured being that mankind, even in his unregenerate state, still seeks and longs for God.
This is one of the reasons I asked you about when Cornelius was regenerated. We both agree that it occurred before he was baptized, but at what point?
G
guanophore
Guest
Oh I heartely disagree. I think there is plenty of evidence just within the scriptures to refute all of these. Those scriptures may not make a dent, of course, if the person who wishes to cling to Reformed theology cannot admit them into evidence, as is often the case. In order to maintain the “solas”, a great deal of Scripture has to be twisted or ignored.
I do agree with you, though, the testimony of what the Church believed and taught, found in the Early Fathers, is also a powerful and intelligent refutation of Calvin’s doctrines.
I think you really nailed it here with this statement. When one takes into account the Once for All divine deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, all doctrines that are created by men and depart from the One Faith are weakened.
Always.
This is a false premise, which cannot in itself be supported by Scripture. It is one of the most destructive heresies in all of Christendom, and is one of the main causes for the division that exists. An excellent example of an extrabiblical doctrine!
- Status