please explain TULIP and then Catholic disagreements

[guanophore]

If you look closer, the source was posted. Noticed that I had three works of Augustine with three different sources.

I did go back and figure it out, thanks.

 

[Cr8ton]

Actually, the vast majority of Cafeteria Catholics have excommunicated themselves, and don’t know it.

So if you disagree with any one thing the CC teaches you are no longer a Catholic according to the CC?

 

[theogrit]

I personally have been found unqualified to discuss TULIP by our only Calvanits because I failed to embrace one or the other Western theological speculations on predestination.
…

It seems that this section was written to refute the idea that all are called?

Whereas Catholics believe that God desires all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, Calvanists don’t believe this?

I am curious what Calvanitsts do with the scriptures that indicate God calls everyone to repent, and that He gives the desire to everyman to seek and find Him.

I would like to continue to discuss the other petals as well, but I think it is too much all at once. I thank you for your excellent summary.

\

Thanks again for your kind welcome.

I’m sure you’ll appreciate that I’m so happy to see an immediate reference to the Scriptures in a dialog concerning whatever discrepancies exist between Catholics and Calvinists. Far too many Calvinists wrongly entertain some notion that much of the studied tradition of Catholic dogma simply sprang out of a pope’s head.

It’s also a welcomed assessment that the Scriptures are in complete harmony within their array, and that the theologian’s task is to discover how this harmony so is, among seemingly disparate parts of the whole. Thus, what one does with the Scriptures, whether Calvinist or Catholic must be consistent with the systematic truth of Scripture throughout. I’m sure there are other views, but perhaps we are in agreement on this.

Systematic theology can be a considerable task for both the Calvinist and the Catholic, especially as expressing both the being and nature of our God in the details of God’s desires and interactions with man.

I’d be the first to acknowledge some significant differentiation among Calvinists as regarding God’s desires, calling, and gifts. A “sincere offer” of the Gospel has been much debated among Calvinists, as to whether or not God seeks the salvation of every soul or only the salvation of His elect (those whom He has chosen and whose names are in the Lamb’s book of life (Rev. 20:15)). I’m of the latter, of what is sometimes termed a Clarkian Calvinist (after Gordon H. Clark) as opposed to a Vantillian Calvinist (after Cornelius Van Til) - the apologetics are often displayed in more theological terms as supralapsarianism vs infralapsarianism, though I don’t know that all the terminology is helpful or necessary for our discussion. It perhaps suffices to clarify my particular Calvinistic position.

I’m the sort of Calvinist who doesn’t believe in atheists. When we speak of God calling everyone to repent and of His gifting every soul with a desire to seek and find Him, I find that God has more or less built this into our genetic code, that as His creatures we naturally know both our Creator and our dependence upon Him. I find this is what the Apostle Paul describes in Romans 1:
“For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.” (1:19-21, NAB)
However, I also find this “knowledge” to be in keeping with the same sort of “knowledge” that daemons have (James 2:19: “You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.” NAB), distinct from the saving knowledge required for eternal fellowship with God. So, in one sense we each seek God and want to know more of Him, more of a knowledge of the Truth, but not all of us creatures are happy about the “every knee shall bend before me, and every tongue shall give praise to God” (Rom 14:11, NAB), nor will every person escape the pool of fire regardless of bending their knees before Almighty God (Rev. 20:15: “Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the pool of fire.”, NAB).

For me, in the harmony of Scripture, God is Almighty and accomplishes all He desires. There is absolutely nothing God decrees that will not come to pass, and if God wants a thing done it will be done - that is part and parcel to God being God and Sovereign over all He has made. Does this present certain quandaries for the presence of evil in the world or there even being an eternal pool of fire? It does, though the “problem of evil” is something both Calvinists and Catholics strive to accurately apologize, and are often not dissimilar in their responses.

To the point, “Whereas Catholics believe that God desires all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, Calvanists don’t believe this?”, most Calvinists try to broaden their perspective in the context of the passage in 1 Timothy 2:
“First of all, then, I ask that supplications, prayers, petitions, and thanksgivings be offered for everyone, for kings and for all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and tranquil life in all devotion and dignity. This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all. This was the testimony at the proper time.” (vs. 1-6, NAB)
We would usually assert that the passage has in mind the diversity among all types of men, whether they be king or commoner, Jew or Gentile, man or women, as the passage also later specifies. That this harmonizes both God’s eternal salvation of some and eternal condemnation of others, and is the clearest intent of this passage mentioning types of people.

 

[guanophore]

So if you disagree with any one thing the CC teaches you are no longer a Catholic according to the CC?

No, it matters more about the manner in which it is done. Peter gives a good example. He, nor any of the disciples understood what Jesus was teaching them about eating his Body and Blood. However, he recognized “to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life”. If we believe God will make it clear in His own time, and continue to study and pray through our disagreements, God will lead us into understanding the fullness.

It is an attitude of humility, that accepts the authority He gave to the Church, and the gifts (infallibility) and recognizes that it is not the Church, but we ourselves that lack the fullness.

 

[guanophore]

Far too many Calvinists wrongly entertain some notion that much of the studied tradition of Catholic dogma simply sprang out of a pope's head.

Not just Calvanists either.

Yes, we get that a lot around here.

Thus, what one does with the Scriptures, whether Calvinist or Catholic must be consistent with the systematic truth of Scripture throughout.  I'm sure there are other views, but perhaps we are in agreement on this.

Indeed!

And for Catholics, it must also be consistent with what God has revealed to the Church to date.

I'm the sort of Calvinist who doesn't believe in atheists.  When we speak of God calling everyone to repent and of His gifting every soul with a desire to seek and find Him, I find that God has more or less built this into our genetic code, that as His creatures we naturally know both our Creator and our dependence upon Him.  I find this is what the Apostle Paul describes in Romans 1:

I am very relieved to hear this. I did not know that there were any Calvanists that believed this, and it has been one of my main puzzlements about Calvanism. The other part that bothers me, and maybe we can get into this under the "depravity’ point, is that it seems to me that, since God has placed in everyone the ability to recognize Him as God, and to seek Him,and honor Him as such, this contradicts the notion of Total Depravity. Maybe I am misunderstanding the doctrine, but when I read it it seems to state that man is unable to do this these things, when Scripture seems to clearly indicate that he does.

However, I also find this “knowledge” to be in keeping with the same sort of “knowledge” that daemons have (James 2:19: “You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.” NAB), distinct from the saving knowledge required for eternal fellowship with God.

I think we are in agreement that one cannot have “saving knowledge” apart from grace, which the demons are unable to access.

In one sense we each seek God and want to know more of Him, more of a knowledge of the Truth, but not all of us creatures are happy about the "every knee shall bend before me, and every tongue shall give praise to God" (Rom 14:11,

I would say the majority. In fact, I would say that even among those that respond to his grace, many may be found that still have trouble with total submission to His glorious grace.

*NAB*), nor will every person escape the pool of fire regardless of bending their knees before Almighty God (Rev. 20:15: "Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the pool of fire.", *NAB*).

This is getting into the topic of perseverance, which would be better left until later, but one of my questions on this topic is that it seems to clear to me that it is possible for one’s name to be “blotted out” of that book of life.

 God is Almighty and accomplishes all He desires.

Perhaps you will be able to explain why Scripture states he desires all to be saved, yet they are not?

 There is absolutely nothing God decrees that will not come to pass, and if God wants a thing done it will be done - that is part and parcel to God being God and Sovereign over all He has made.

I understand this concept. However, it also seems clear that the Apostles taught that not all that God desires or wills does come to pass.

This would also presuppose, would it not, that He intended for Adam and Eve to fall?

 Does this present certain quandaries for the presence of evil in the world or there even being an eternal pool of fire?  It does, though the "problem of evil" is something both Calvinists and Catholics strive to accurately apologize, and are often not dissimilar in their responses.

They seem quite dissimlar to me. However, I have never met a Calvanist that believes as you do,or has been able to express it in this way, so perhaps I will come to realize that they are not dissimilar.

To the point, “Whereas Catholics believe that God desires all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, Calvanists don’t believe this?”, most Calvinists try to broaden their perspective in the context of the passage in 1 Timothy 2:

We would usually assert that the passage has in mind the diversity among all types of men, whether they be king or commoner, Jew or Gentile, man or women, as the passage also later specifies. That this harmonizes both God’s eternal salvation of some and eternal condemnation of others, and is the clearest intent of this passage mentioning types of people.

I am lost on this. Where, from this passage, do you see that He wished eternal condemnation of some?

 

[2nd_Adam]

I don’t find this very useful, 2nd. Catholics, and I suspect Armenians, both believe that God’s prevenient grace is also sovereign.
.

That’s an interesting comment that I never heard before. Could you please post what is prevenient grace, and how you believe it is sovereign? I guess this conversation would fall under the “I” in TULIP.

Maybe you can help me understand, then, how it is that God desires all to be saved, but they are not?

Please see Theogrit’s post 183 on your question above. It is very important to qualify the"all" on passages. If we don’t, we would be preaching universalism on many many passages such as 1 John 2:2.

I am sure God “can” do whatever He wants, but it denies His loving nature to command that which He does not enable His creatures to do. He commands us to keep His Law because obedience results in freedom.

This is where our theological roads appear to split. I believe God enables all His chosen ones to obey His command to believe in His Son in an effectual way. God demonstrates His love for us in sending His Son to die for them… so that they can come near to God… calling God abba Father. So, at the cross we see God’s justice and His love in perfect harmony… which is glorious and amazing. The us or we in the following passage is speaking about a certain group of sinners, correct?

Peace with God Through Faith

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. - Rom 5

 

[2nd_Adam]

I am lost on this. Where, from this passage, do you see that He wished eternal condemnation of some?

I believe when Scripture speaks of predestination, it is speaking about the elect to eternal life with God, even though double predestination is still true. If calling, enabling, preserving transforming sustaining grace is required to enter Heaven, then does God provide what is needed to His elect, and simply pass over the rest of humanity leaving them to do what comes natural to them? Grace is not owed to anyone, especially to those who rebel against Him. I think this is consistent with Catholic Theology’s allowable Thomist’s view of predestination. We have to explore what is divine justice? God serves justice for sin for those who are not in Christ. They get what they deserve. On the other hand, those who are in Christ do not get what they deserve. Instead, Christians receive mercy and saving transforming grace. The rain falls on the unrighteous and righteous alike, so there is common grace given to all mankind each and everyday. We know that the wages of sin is death, therefore it is soley by the grace of God that the unbeliever has another day to live, instead of God withdrawing the gift of life from those who are in rebellion against Him.

 

[Carlan]

Originally Posted by 2nd Adam

Here you go. I think you guys need to do some self-study before we continue. After you study for awhile, we can graciously discuss these issues to the glory of God alone down the road. I don’t think everyone has the right Christian motive to discuss such deep glorious issues about Christ and Him crucified. It doesn’t seem that this thread will glorify God at all, nor will it help Christian unity. Discussing doctrine for doctrine sake is meaningless. Doctrine when applied to the heart and mind will grow our love and affection for God. Without that proper motive, we will stumble each other to sin.

I think Christians who consider themselves to be Reformed would approve of these two links for a proper understanding of Calvinism. These are not simplistic issues, and require much reflection and thinking. Therefore, these two sites are quite extensive.

monergism.com/

reformed.org/

For those who understand my thoughts about doctrine which grows our love and affection for God, please start here:
desiringgod.org/ResourceL…_of_Calvinism/

---

I would just like to say what I think about the discussion of all this.

The petals of the tulip were the work of the Calvinist religion. The Church does not consider such as part of the deposit of faith, therefore I am not interested in reading the material in the links which Adam has supplied for the furthering of my education of Calvinism even tho’ it is said to be based on the Gospel. The Church does not accept it and therefore neither do I. There, uncharitable or not. Carlan

 

[2nd_Adam]

---

I would just like to say what I think about the discussion of all this.

The petals of the tulip were the work of the Calvinist religion. The Church does not consider such as part of the deposit of faith, therefore I am not interested in reading the material in the links which Adam has supplied for the furthering of my education of Calvinism even tho’ it is said to be based on the Gospel. The Church does not accept it and therefore neither do I. There, uncharitable or not. Carlan

Could you please share your view on predestination since it is a biblical teaching and a Catholic teaching?

 

[Thing]

2ndAdam, is your view and John Calvins view of predestination exactly and precisely the same, in all respects?

 

[Sunflower15]

Well, we are discussing our Triune God who’s ways are above our ways. His wisdom is so much above us, so we need to approach the topic with awe and worship of our Triune God. We all have our presuppositions and need to understand how we see things through the glasses we are seeing our God. What is your chief aim in life as a Catholic Christian? Please be patient and charitable with me, since this is my first attempt outside the non-Catholic Forum site. And we all know this particular topic will cause sparks to fly.

I’m glad you ‘ventured out’!
WELCOME!!!

I have never heard of TULIP, so far it doesn’t sound like something I will agree with…however, it IS wonderful that we can come together in a forum and explain it, argue it, affirm or deny it, and still be part of the Body of Christ…

Pax Christi,

 

[2nd_Adam]

2ndAdam, is your view and John Calvins view of predestination exactly and precisely the same, in all respects?

I’m not sure exactly what Calvin believed in all aspects of predestination. There is much mystery on this biblical doctrine. So, I am very teachable and open in this particular area within my own framework in what I already received and believe. But, I do embrace the 5 points of Calvinism, and have for many years because I believe it is the most God-centered and biblical view with the central theme of to “all be the glory to God alone”. I personally don’t see alternative views found within Arminian Protestantism and the Catholic Faith to be consistent with Soli Deo gloria (“glory to God alone”). God’s ways are not our ways, therefore, I believe our thoughts, affections and beliefs have to be driven by Sacred Scripture alone. Our human reasoning cannot be trusted over and above in what is written.

 

[2nd_Adam]

I’m glad you ‘ventured out’!
WELCOME!!!

I have never heard of TULIP, so far it doesn’t sound like something I will agree with…however, it IS wonderful that we can come together in a forum and explain it, argue it, affirm or deny it, and still be part of the Body of Christ…

Pax Christi,

Right on sister, I am a supporter of ECT 1 and ECT II.

 

[Thing]

I’m not sure exactly what Calvin believed in all aspects of predestination. There is much mystery on this biblical doctrine. So, I am very teachable and open in this particular area within my own framework in what I already received and believe. But, I do embrace the 5 points of Calvinism, and have for many years because I believe it is the most God-centered and biblical view with the central theme of to “all be the glory to God alone”. I personally don’t see alternative views found within Arminian Protestantism and the Catholic Faith to be consistent with Soli Deo gloria (“glory to God alone”). God’s ways are not our ways, therefore, I believe our thoughts, affections and beliefs have to be driven by Sacred Scripture alone. Our human reasoning cannot be trusted over and above in what is written.

So you are not actually a Calvinist. You have moved off in some other direction, otherwise you would know and agree with what Calvin instituted.

 

[Sunflower15]

Right on sister, I am a supporter of ECT 1 and ECT II.

I know everyone on this thread will dislike my view, which I don’t claim to be the official teaching of ANY church, but it is the Catholic teaching AS I UNDERSTAND it…humbly…with all my limitations…

God creates all people, God loves all people, God saves all people, God wants all people to accept salvation…SO, it seems to me that ALL are predestined by God for salvation by grace, which must be accepted in FREE WILL for the Glory of God. Where we seem to differ by Christian tradition is HOW this salvation is ACCEPTED [it is only ‘issued’ by Grace] but how we accept it and it becomes effective…that’s the stumbling block…in my humble opinion…

Some say just say so and it is…others say, yes you must do that but ONLY use words IF ABSOLUTELY necessary…meaning ‘LIVE IT’…not to ‘earn it’ but to ‘accept it’…

**ALL people…are called!

I love Jesus for many reasons, but especially because** unlike other ‘holy teachers’, He never said…IF you want to be saved, THEN you MUST:

1. study and learn until you become an expert at holy texts, theology, philosophy, etc.
2. fast, pray & do penance until your body becomes so sick that you are more dead than alive, and therefore you become ‘above this world’ and ‘enlightened’
3. you become a master apologist and can out-argue the devil himself, if needed
4. have a specific physical /psychological trait or develop it somehow
5. come from a specific bloodline to inherit the kingdom
6. become irrational and fanatic for the sake of God
7. undergo extreme forms of rituals and rites of passage to prove you deserve it
8. on …and on…and on…

He basically said, all who feel like giving up, who cannot go on anymore, just come to Me…I’ll give you what you truly need to be FREE and to have JOY [which is no promise of happiness…in the sense of bliss] And then, DO AS I DO! Just as I DO WHAT THE FATHER sent ME TO DO…DO LIKEWISE UNTO OTHERS…

I know, I know, my theology is all messed up, all sorts of links to ancient councils will be posted, and Fathers of the Church and Reformers are going to be quoted…oh well…

 

[2nd_Adam]

So you are not actually a Calvinist. You have moved off in some other direction, otherwise you would know and agree with what Calvin instituted.

If you go to Monergism.com or reformed.org, you will find that John Calvin is not the standard for Calvinism. The actual standard of Calvinism is Sacred Scripture alone. But, hey… if you just want to label me as a Christian and not a Calvinist… I will take that compliment any day of the week. John Calvin knew in part just like the Apostle Paul. Calvinism has a long history… tracing back to the Apostles, OT Saints, and even God Himself.

“The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox’s gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again.”—C. H. Spurgeon

Here’s an interesting read to explain where I am coming from in response to your post:

spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm

 

[theogrit]

The other part that bothers me, and maybe we can get into this under the "depravity’ point, is that it seems to me that, since God has placed in everyone the ability to recognize Him as God, and to seek Him, and honor Him as such, this contradicts the notion of Total Depravity. Maybe I am misunderstanding the doctrine, but when I read it it seems to state that man is unable to do this these things, when Scripture seems to clearly indicate that he does.

“Honor Him as such” is perhaps our focus of interest. It’s usually thought that Calvinists disagree with the concept of free will, but no Christian claims that man’s will is truly free in the same sense that God’s will is. Man’s will is always subject to God’s will, of necessity. Our will functions under the constraints of being God’s creature. Only God is truly free to do whatever He pleases. But the Calvinist does not deny that God has naturally created us with an ability to make moral choices, only that man’s will is also naturally bound to what he desires, and since the Fall man’s desire is obviously incapable of perfect continual goodness in obedience to God’s requirements. Only God’s grace (which the Calvinistic doctrines of grace indeed espouse) can rectify what is lacking by original sin. The sticky issue for all theologians in this, is navigating our way through God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility. No one wants to present either an evil or a limp god, either a god who is unjust in condemning man or ineffective in ruling over him.

“Total Depravity”, or “inability”, as we clarify, really hinges on concepts of Original Sin and just what Catholics, Calvinists, or others think happened to mankind with the event of Adam’s sin, both regarding God’s decree that, “From that tree [of knowledge of good and bad] you shall not eat; the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die”, man’s action of, “…and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized that they were naked…”, and God’s further decree of curse that, “For you are dirt, and to dirt you shall return” (Gen 2-3, NAB). It’s been articulated various ways over the ages, and some Calvinists have developed a reluctance to certain notions of common grace, but essentially Calvinists adopted or adapted presentations of St. Augustine of Hippo in his battle with Pelagius, that, “man is said to have free will, not because he has a free choice of good and evil, but because he acts voluntarily, and not of compulsion… That man is not forced to be the servant of sin, while he is, however, ethelodoulos (a voluntary slave); his will being bound by the fetters of sin” (Calvin, Institutes). Augustine argued that what was once a moral possibility before the Fall became, without grace, a moral impossibility after. So, while man has free will of natural ability, he no longer possesses free will of moral ability. Again, man naturally yearns for God, but is incapable of honouring Him as such, apart from a further infusion of God’s grace to that end. Many Catholics would perhaps maintain that a type of prevenient grace comes to bear:
“The Synod furthermore declares, that in adults, the beginning of the said Justification is to be derived from the prevenient grace of God, through Jesus Christ, that is to say, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits existing on their parts, they are called; that so they, who by sins were alienated from God, may be disposed through His quickening and assisting grace, to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and co-operating with that said grace.” (Council of Trent)

Perhaps you will be able to explain why Scripture states he desires all to be saved, yet they are not?
I understand this concept. However, it also seems clear that the Apostles taught that not all that God desires or wills does come to pass.

This would also presuppose, would it not, that He intended for Adam and Eve to fall?

This is sure to be the most difficult and muddy of presentations, but I nowhere find in the Scriptures that God desires each soul to be saved. However, a lot depends on carefully defining things like desire, will, all… and particularly contextual studies of word meanings in the original Bible languages. As mentioned earlier, there are even quite dramatic distinctions to be made among Calvinists.

All Calvinists would agree that God decreed the Fall of Adam and Eve, though care should be taken in clarifying such. Catholics too, though, would perhaps agree that it was no surprise to Him, and that in the Son He always has had a very purposeful rationale behind its allowance. But, for example, it could well be argued that most Calvinists (of an infralapsarian position; infra below, lapsus fall) would assert that God’s choosing of people to salvation was reactive to considerations of the Fall, while supralapsarians (supra above, lapsus fall), like myself, would argue that the Fall was planned with the eternal state of God’s chosen people in mind. The topic is worthy of deep and lovingly embracing considerations; but, as you say, such speculation is unwarranted and unnecessary to the plain text of Scripture - it is only a Western trait of logical presupposition within the context of systematic cohesion and harmonization of Scripture with Scripture, to which Calvinists have a propensity.

 

[2nd_Adam]

I know everyone on this thread will dislike my view, which I don’t claim to be the official teaching of ANY church, but it is the Catholic teaching AS I UNDERSTAND it…humbly…with all my limitations…

God creates all people, God loves all people, God saves all people, God wants all people to accept salvation…SO, it seems to me that ALL are predestined by God for salvation by grace, which must be accepted in FREE WILL for the Glory of God. Where we seem to differ by Christian tradition is HOW this salvation is ACCEPTED [it is only ‘issued’ by Grace] but how we accept it and it becomes effective…that’s the stumbling block…in my humble opinion…

Some say just say so and it is…others say, yes you must do that but ONLY use words IF ABSOLUTELY necessary…meaning ‘LIVE IT’…not to ‘earn it’ but to ‘accept it’…

**ALL people…are called!

I love Jesus for many reasons, but especially because** unlike other ‘holy teachers’, He never said…IF you want to be saved, THEN you MUST:

1. study and learn until you become an expert at holy texts, theology, philosophy, etc.
2. fast, pray & do penance until your body becomes so sick that you are more dead than alive, and therefore you become ‘above this world’ and ‘enlightened’
3. you become a master apologist and can out-argue the devil himself, if needed
4. have a specific physical /psychological trait or develop it somehow
5. come from a specific bloodline to inherit the kingdom
6. become irrational and fanatic for the sake of God
7. undergo extreme forms of rituals and rites of passage to prove you deserve it
8. on …and on…and on…

He basically said, all who feel like giving up, who cannot go on anymore, just come to Me…I’ll give you what you truly need to be FREE and to have JOY [which is no promise of happiness…in the sense of bliss] And then, DO AS I DO! Just as I DO WHAT THE FATHER sent ME TO DO…DO LIKEWISE UNTO OTHERS…

I know, I know, my theology is all messed up, all sorts of links to ancient councils will be posted, and Fathers of the Church and Reformers are going to be quoted…oh well…

Hi dear sister in Christ,

I mean this from the depths of my soul. It’s not about what you know or how much you know… because God is an infinte God. God’s wisdom is so much apart from our wisdom… who can know all the fullness of God? Christianity is really about who you know. Please continue to share on this thread. Sound doctrine when applied by the Spirit to our minds and hearts will grow us in our affection for God.

Your brother in Christ,

DC

The Great Commandment

And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

 

[Thing]

If you go to Monergism.com or reformed.org, you will find that John Calvin is not the standard for Calvinism. The actual standard of Calvinism is Sacred Scripture alone. But, hey… if you just want to label me as a Christian and not a Calvinist… I will take that compliment any day of the week. John Calvin knew in part just like the Apostle Paul. Calvinism has a long history… tracing back to the Apostles, OT Saints, and even God Himself.

Here’s an interesting read to explain where I am coming from in response to your post:

spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm

I am just looking at this, in my minds eye so to speak, as two armies facing each other off. On the one hand you have the Catholic position on predestination which contains maybe half a dozen points which all must believe; then you get this other view in opposition.
It starts off by telling you it is Calvinist - so it believes a certain thing, presumably.
Then it tells you Calvanism is not really now what Calvin thought, probably; then it tells you that hey presto Catholicism is actually becoming very like Calvinism.

See my problem. Calvinism appears to be moving around the place while telling us we are moving, really. Which is why debating Catholic Doctrine is just not done, I suppose, because its not moving around the place. We know what we believe.

I cannot believe that a Good God *created *you, Adam, to go straight into hell forever.

 

[Sunflower15]

---

…The Church does not accept it and therefore neither do I. There, uncharitable or not. Carlan

The Church does not accept uncharitable behavior either!