Protestant view on christ's sacrifice.

[KathleenGee]

Cloudman…

Your understanding of predestination is from earthly, man-based understanding.

Christ died for all men, all predestined for this new life and reconciliation with the Father through Christ’s death and resurrection. But all men were created with free will and thus, although all are predestined, not all are responding to the grace Christ has given.

You are leaving out the free will and intellect God has given us.

I am reading a little on the side here that Calvin taught that Christ went to hell…where as we believe He descended to free the just and open the doors of heaven for them. I am also reading how those professors, who excell in ‘semantics’, but are more reflective of an Anabaptist tradition, are now attacking and fragmenting the Apostles Creed.

Check out www.calledtocommunion.com that discusses foundational differences between the universal, apostolic Church vs the Protestant fundamentals explained by former Protestants now Catholic, who have experience of knowledge of belief and practices of both.

 

[cloudman]

Not exactly, cloudman.

Do not the Scriptures state that even the demons believe?

What I am saying is consistent with John 3. I’d argue that the demons have the same sort of belief that Jesus dealt with in John 2:23-25. That kind of belief does not make someone a believer.

When Jesus refers to believers…or “whosoever believes” Jesus is referring to a particular disposition in a person. I believe that the Spirit of God causes this disposition. I do not believe theologies that teach that God grants grace as a reaction to something that we do. This is an impossibility. It can easily be proven from scripture that this is in fact an impossibility.

John 3:6 is a verse that creates serious problems for theologies that teach that justification is God’s reaction to something good found in the volition of man. The carnal man is dead in trespasses and sins. That is what Paul tells us in Ephesians 2. There is no spiritual life that exists in the carnal man. For the carnal man to generate something that God would consider positive…the carnal man’s flesh would have to produce something other than flesh.

There is also Ecclesiastes 9:3 and Genesis 6:5. If the heart is “full of evil” then that means it is 100% evil and 0% good. A 100% evil heart can’t do anything positive to contribute to a person’s salvation. That is why “every imagination of the thoughts of [man’s] heart is only evil continually.”

 

[cloudman]

I am sure you know he meant believer, which equals a Christian

That is actually what I was saying. I was very careful to use the word “believer” rather than “believe”. “Believer” expresses a certain quality that is woven into the spiritual DNA of a person by the Spirit of God.

 

[PRmerger]

I do not believe theologies that teach that God grants grace as a reaction to something that we do.

Indeed. This is very Catholic!

In fact, Catholics are so committed to the understanding that we don’t have to “do” anything to merit God’s grace that we even baptize infants! These little babes have done no work whatsoever, yet are the recipients of God’s free and fruitful gift of grace!

 

[cloudman]

Indeed. This is very Catholic!

In fact, Catholics are so committed to the understanding that we don’t have to “do” anything to merit God’s grace that we even baptize infants! These little babes have done no work whatsoever, yet are the recipients of God’s free and fruitful gift of grace!

What I mean by that statement is different than what you would probably mean by the statement. My understanding of the Roman Catholic teaching is that God ceases to be this way with respect to our sanctification and glorification.

 

[cloudman]

Cloudman…

Your understanding of predestination is from earthly, man-based understanding.

Christ died for all men, all predestined for this new life and reconciliation with the Father through Christ’s death and resurrection. But all men were created with free will and thus, although all are predestined, not all are responding to the grace Christ has given.

You are leaving out the free will and intellect God has given us.

I am reading a little on the side here that Calvin taught that Christ went to hell…where as we believe He descended to free the just and open the doors of heaven for them. I am also reading how those professors, who excell in ‘semantics’, but are more reflective of an Anabaptist tradition, are now attacking and fragmenting the Apostles Creed.

Check out www.calledtocommunion.com that discusses foundational differences between the universal, apostolic Church vs the Protestant fundamentals explained by former Protestants now Catholic, who have experience of knowledge of belief and practices of both.

If I found free will somewhere in the pages of scripture, then I would have included it. The more I read scripture, though, the more I am convinced that the gospel is not the idea that we have free will round 2 except this time we get a go at it with a fallen sin nature. That would be terrible news. What hope do we have to properly exercise free will if even Adam, who had no sin nature, couldn’t properly exercise it?

We find out very early on in the book of Genesis that free will is not the answer.

 

[cloudman]

stewstew kind-of-sort-of beat me to the punch on this one, cloudman, but I am going to ask you anyway and I hope you won’t take offense to it. How do you know…not just feel, but objectively know that Christ died for your sins and intercedes at the right hand of the Father for you?

Jesus said that His people would be known by their fruits. Paul even said that people need to work out their salvation. I don’t believe that Paul was saying that we need to tack on to the finished work of Christ with our works. What I believe Paul was saying is that objective assurance of salvation comes from witnessing the Spirit of God change us in objective ways that even others can witness as well.

 

[IggyAntiochus]

Jesus said that His people would be known by their fruits. Paul even said that people need to work out their salvation. I don’t believe that Paul was saying that we need to tack on to the finished work of Christ with our works. What I believe Paul was saying is that objective assurance of salvation comes from witnessing the Spirit of God change us in objective ways that even others can witness as well.

This has consistently been the Calvinist answer to that question, cloud. I mean this with all respect, but I would hate to have to be in the position of relying on my own works, fruits, inner feelings, etc., in order to have confidence that Christ has atoned for my sins. Perhaps your conscience is not as troubled as some, and if so, I applaud you. I would hate to have to navel gaze in order to determine that, however.

 

[cloudman]

This has consistently been the Calvinist answer to that question, cloud. I mean this with all respect, but I would hate to have to be in the position of relying on my own works, fruits, inner feelings, etc., in order to have confidence that Christ has atoned for my sins. Perhaps your conscience is not as troubled as some, and if so, I applaud you. I would hate to have to navel gaze in order to determine that, however.

I don’t see it as me relying on anything. If you get a chance read Psalm 1 and meditate it on what it is really saying.

Fruit is something that comes in season. It is also something that is the result of the tree that is planted by streams of water that has just been soaking in the richness of the Word of God over a long period of time. Fruit is a work of the Spirit.

There was a point when I discovered that I had been relying on my belief to make me feel secure about my salvation. It is not our belief that should give us security. What should give us security is knowing that God is rich in mercy and grace. What should give us security is knowing that God turns down no one who pleads before the throne of grace. I believe that the people of God spend much of their lives on their knees before the throne of grace.

If a person spends their life on their knees before the throne of grace pleading with God to conform him/her to the image of Christ…do you actually think that God who is rich in mercy and grace will refuse that prayer?

 

[IggyAntiochus]

I don’t see it as me relying on anything. If you get a chance read Psalm 1 and meditate it on what it is really saying.

Fruit is something that comes in season. It is also something that is the result of the tree that is planted by streams of water that has just been soaking in the richness of the Word of God over a long period of time. Fruit is a work of the Spirit.

There was a point when I discovered that I had been relying on my belief to make me feel secure about my salvation. It is not our belief that should give us security. What should give us security is knowing that God is rich in mercy and grace. What should give us security is knowing that God turns down no one who pleads before the throne of grace. I bepro melieve that the people of God spend much of their lives on their knees before the throne of grace.

If a person spends their life on their knees before the throne of grace pleading with God to conform him/her to the image of Christ…do you actually think that God who is rich in mercy and grace will refuse that prayer?

I am not arguing that Christians are not to or do not produce the fruits of faith, cloud. What I am stating is that I would not want to be in the position of relying on such fruits to give me some intuitive, subjective evidence that Christ has died for my sins.

Such a doctrine as limited atonement robs the Christian of any objective, real evidence that Christ has reconciled them to God by His work on the cross. It takes the locus of faith, that is, Christ crucified for me, and instead turns the faith inward to the interior life of the Christian to determine whether Christ’s merits are for me. This is not trust in the cross, it is trust in the quality of my own faith and its fruits.

 

[cloudman]

I am not arguing that Christians are not to or do not produce the fruits of faith, cloud. What I am stating is that I would not want to be in the position of relying on such fruits to give me some intuitive, subjective evidence that Christ has died for my sins.

Such a doctrine as limited atonement robs the Christian of any objective, real evidence that Christ has reconciled them to God by His work on the cross. It takes the locus of faith, that is, Christ crucified for me, and instead turns the faith inward to the interior life of the Christian to determine whether Christ’s merits are for me. This is not trust in the cross, it is trust in the quality of my own faith and its fruits.

I see it the other way…if we admit that God could look His own Son, who is our intercessor, straight in the eyes and reject the intercession of His Son for those that His Son died for to reconcile them to Himself, then we shake the very foundation of every certainty that we could have of our own salvation.

Any denial of limited atonement is the admission that the Son’s sacrifice does not fully satisfy the justice of the Father. If Christ’s sacrifice does not fully satisfy the Father…that is a tragedy.

 

[IggyAntiochus]

I see it the other way…if we admit that God could look His own Son, who is our intercessor, straight in the eyes and reject the intercession of His Son for those that His Son died for to reconcile them to Himself, then we shake the very foundation of every certainty that we could have of our own salvation.

Any denial of limited atonement is the admission that the Son’s sacrifice does not fully satisfy the justice of the Father. If Christ’s sacrifice does not fully satisfy the Father…that is a tragedy.

The greater tragedy is not having any way to know whether or not you’re one of the ones He died for.

 

[PRmerger]

The greater tragedy is not having any way to know whether or not you’re one of the ones He died for.

Indeed.

I am not well-versed in Calvinism, but I would assume that Calvinists believe in the assurance of salvation?

Cloudman? Yes? You believe that you are saved?

How do you reconcile this with the fact that you cannot state what human persons Christ would not intercede for?

 

[KathleenGee]

Cloudman,

Man is made in the image of God: free will, intellect, and soul, plus the work to subdue and order the world around him. To do this, requires freedom of being and intellect.

Secondly, your concept of Christ’s humanity – and His divinity – is compromised and limited.

Christ in Spirit was at the throne of God, and became man through the Holy Spirit and Mary. He returned to the throne of God through His resurrection and ascension into heaven…not healed of His wounds, but those still visible, as the Lamb of God united to the altar on earth.

John 6 gives the context. There is the introduction of revealing to His disciples and followers that He would provide eternal life through His Body and Blood. When most left Him, He did not tell His apostles, Oh, I was just speaking in symbols.’ His flesh then, would mean nothing, would have no purpose.

He comments on those who left and their faith…would they believe in His ascension and return to the throne of God???

He then said the flesh is to no avail…that it is the Spirit one must be focused on…to believe in the Eucharist is to believe the Spirit of God is there…but our faith in the Eucharist draws not on the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ in that time…but rather, the perpetual sacrifice through the ordinary elements of bread and wine are transformed into the body, blood, soul, and Divinity of the Resurrected and Glorified Lord ascended into heaven.

Again, I refer you like wise to www.calledtocommunion.com that is at present discussing Calvinism…its ideas on ‘being saved’, on ecclesiology and how this man’s beliefs differ from the universal beliefs we have held in common for 2,000 years animated by the Holy Spirit. We do not switch to follow a man’s teachings…can’t see that as true reform.

What you are missing from the history of the Reformation is the truth that the Catholic Church did indeed reform itself at the Council of Trent . The Church is constantly self-reforming, and there were movements already at work, but likewise the desire for self-determination and nationalism were also at work, Germany being one to have its own beliefs…then this movement is leaving the transcendence of faith and forming divisions within Christ based on nationality as well…

 

[cloudman]

Indeed.

I am not well-versed in Calvinism, but I would assume that Calvinists believe in the assurance of salvation?

Cloudman? Yes? You believe that you are saved?

How do you reconcile this with the fact that you cannot state what human persons Christ would not intercede for?

I don’t believe that everyone has assurance of salvation. I believe that a person can have assurance as they see God change their inner person.

I reconcile the two this way…we know that salvation is a process. It the process by which God transforms the person dead in trespasses and sins into the person that is made in the image of Christ. When we see that change occur in our lives we can be assured that God is the one accomplishing that process. That is how a believer can have assurance of their own salvation.

 

[cloudman]

Man is made in the image of God: free will, intellect, and soul, plus the work to subdue and order the world around him. To do this, requires freedom of being and intellect.

I disagree strongly with respect to “free will”. Man certainly has a will, but scripture is clear that man’s will is not free to live a life of righteousness. Man’s will is in bondage to sin. Man’s heart is 100% evil and 0% good. What is born of flesh is flesh. Man is dead in trespasses and sins. That does not sound like free will. Dead people can’t do anything.

 

[cloudman]

nm.

 

[IggyAntiochus]

I don’t believe that everyone has assurance of salvation. I believe that a person can have assurance as they see God change their inner person.

I reconcile the two this way…we know that salvation is a process. It the process by which God transforms the person dead in trespasses and sins into the person that is made in the image of Christ. When we see that change occur in our lives we can be assured that God is the one accomplishing that process. That is how a believer can have assurance of their own salvation.

i.e., the Christian knows that Christ has died for his sins based upon the works of the Christian.

And Calvinists criticize Roman Catholicism for stressing works? What Geneva gives with the right hand (justification sola gratia, sola fide, solus Christus), it takes away with the left (“you know that Christ has paid for your sins by your works and no other way”). It is no wonder that the Puritans were obsessed with knowing whether they truly believed or not. What happens when you fall into grave sin? How is the believer to know Christ has died for him then?

No comfort, none.

 

[cloudman]

The greater tragedy is not having any way to know whether or not you’re one of the ones He died for.

If you are correct, then every single person that is burning in hell right now would beg to differ. What good is it to know that Christ died for you if hell is populated with people that Christ died for?

 

[IggyAntiochus]

If you are correct, then every single person that is burning in hell right now would beg to differ. What good is it to know that Christ died for you if hell is populated with people that Christ died for?

Are the elect justified prior to having faith in Christ, cloud?