W
Wannano
Guest
Last edited:
- Status
M
Michael16
Guest
I’m sorry. I forgot that there isn’t a monolithic Protestant theology.
As for saving faith conversions: I said it seems to require.
As for how I defined it: I thought I laid out clearly and I apologize. I’ll try this way.
What I think the concept describes is a sudden dramatic and irrevocable change of attitude. Almost as if the entire temperament of a person being changed all at once and permanently. Like a sudden moment of crystallizing spiritual metamorphosis of I believe!!
As for Pentecost: I’m thinking the conversion of the 3,000 was that they were impressed by a demonstration of the Holy Spirit’s power and thus they joined the Church.
As for the free will thing: I based my statement on my researches into Lutheran theology; and I’m quoting Luther’s Theology of the Cross; especially Luther’s Thesis 13 in the Heidelberg Disputation of 1518: “ Free will, after the fall, exists in name only and as long as it does as it is able to do, commits a mortal sin. “
This tells me quite clearly, he believed that human will is A: Not free and B: Wills only what is evil.
As for the God forcing Himself thing: If grace is an irresistible gift, that man cannot refuse in any way; isn’t that God forcing Himself on people? Even if it is from love that He forces onto people His grace? As for His love; I didn’t mean to imply He forces His love. From my reading, my understanding is that He forces grace and conversion on an unwilling sinner.
As for the forced conversions into the Church: I understand and accept that such forced conversions indeed occurred. It’s sad.
As for point 7: The Baptism by faith I wrote of is based on my understanding of the saving faith conversion that I just elucidated.
Last edited:
M
Michael16
Guest
Darn tagging feature.
I realize quoting Luther only applies to Lutherans. So, it’s unfair to declare that binding on all Protestants.
In the Reformed tradition, my understanding is that Calvin taught two things: A: Man is totally depraved and B: God predestines who’s saved and who’s damned. No choice for either party.
As for the other Protestant traditions; I’ll be honest. I don’t have a clue.
I realize quoting Luther only applies to Lutherans. So, it’s unfair to declare that binding on all Protestants.
In the Reformed tradition, my understanding is that Calvin taught two things: A: Man is totally depraved and B: God predestines who’s saved and who’s damned. No choice for either party.
As for the other Protestant traditions; I’ll be honest. I don’t have a clue.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Might be half right…the half wrong is predestined to hell, which is a false interpolation on Calvin…hell is default destination of man, due to his own sin, not any predestination not to help…God can only intervene on saving from hell…He can not do away with hell itself as default.
Last edited:
M
Michael16
Guest
Agreed. We’re all bound for hell unless we cooperate with God’s grace.
M
Michael16
Guest
But here’s my thing, mcq. I don’t know which tradition you are, but the Church teaches we have free will to choose if we say yes or no to God.
I’ve been reading some Protestant theology online today, I’ll admit it’s mainly Lutheran; and it seems to me that in y’all’s traditions, free will may be an illusion until God frees you in a saving faith conversion. Am I understanding the general gist?
I’ve been reading some Protestant theology online today, I’ll admit it’s mainly Lutheran; and it seems to me that in y’all’s traditions, free will may be an illusion until God frees you in a saving faith conversion. Am I understanding the general gist?
M
mcq72
Guest
Like I said , quid pro quo, merited grace, an oxymoron.
M
Michael16
Guest
Mcq, to be fair: No faithful Catholic would hold that we merit grace at all. Neither are we a Pelagian works based religion.
He called him father because he was a priest.JonNC:
Even Lutherans don’t follow Luther very well. As I pointed out. Luther taught double predestination. Lutherans don’t.Wow! For followers of Luther, as has been alleged , you guys sure didn’t follow very well
And, where did Calvin learn the doctrines of sola fide and sola scriptura?
Calvin followed Luther. Initially, at least. That’s why he called him, “father”.
But you do, make an interesting point: Luther did dabble with double predestination. Luther was not infallible. The principle of sola scriptura holds doctrine and teachers, including Luther, accountable to scripture as the final norm. The confessions reject double predestination. And as I quoted earlier, Luther says:
I think Luther, here, at the very least, distinguishes himself from Calvin. Calvin was not a follower of Luther.
D
De_Maria
Guest
You’re under the impression that gifts are absolutely free. But gifts are not absolutely free. God gives His gifts to those who merit them in His eyes. Your idea is unbiblical.De_Maria:
Like I said , quid pro quo, merited grace, an oxymoron.
Exodus 20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
D
De_Maria
Guest
Them are strong words, pilgrim. Faithful Catholics believe Church Teaching.
2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace . The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man’s free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man’s merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.
2025 We can have merit in God’s sight only because of God’s free plan to associate man with the work of his grace. Merit is to be ascribed in the first place to the grace of God, and secondly to man’s collaboration. Man’s merit is due to God.
2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God’s wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.
D
De_Maria
Guest
First, thank you for your efforts to respectfully identify teachings by communion. It is refreshing.
On your post: Sort of. The Augsburg Confession:
Interestingly, the Roman Confutation approved.
Last edited:
You’re the first Catholic I’ve seen laugh at the idea of calling a priest, Father.
Last edited:
Actually, it didn’t, at least no more so than the Cistercian abbots who practiced presbyter ordination in the century prior to Luther.
You are obligated to stand with your communion on this point. I recognize that.
I also disagree with it, and consider it false.
M
Michael16
Guest
I understand what you’re saying. But, I have found what Luther said about free will in a 1518 disputation:
“ Free will, after the fall, exists in name only and as long as it does as it is able to do, commits a mortal sin. “
Like I said to Wannano: What Luther says, quite clearly; is that human will is A: Not free and B: Wills only evil.
If I’m not mistaken this thesis pretty much forms the basis of his book On The Bondage Of the Will.
From my reading of your quote from the Augsburg Confession and the theses from the Heidelberg Disputation of 1518; Luther pretty much was consistent in his belief that human will cannot effect a good work at all.
In addition: Saint Paul wrote “ The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. “ which affirms that the human will, in accordance with common sense when you observe people in action; can will something good.
Say, a man’s son is sick and needs water. Even an atheist will give his son water as an act of mercy. This would accord with God’s Will in my understanding.
“ Free will, after the fall, exists in name only and as long as it does as it is able to do, commits a mortal sin. “
Like I said to Wannano: What Luther says, quite clearly; is that human will is A: Not free and B: Wills only evil.
If I’m not mistaken this thesis pretty much forms the basis of his book On The Bondage Of the Will.
From my reading of your quote from the Augsburg Confession and the theses from the Heidelberg Disputation of 1518; Luther pretty much was consistent in his belief that human will cannot effect a good work at all.
In addition: Saint Paul wrote “ The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. “ which affirms that the human will, in accordance with common sense when you observe people in action; can will something good.
Say, a man’s son is sick and needs water. Even an atheist will give his son water as an act of mercy. This would accord with God’s Will in my understanding.
Last edited:
M
Michael16
Guest
The Cistercian abbots you mentioned we’re in communion with Rome and thus possessed Apostolic Succession. Thus, their ordinations would be valid. Their teaching was in accord with the Apostolic teaching.
Luther was an excommunicated priest teaching a heresy that violated Apostolic teaching who broke away, leaving communion with; from Rome. That leaves the lineage of Apostolic Succession. That alone invalidates any ordinations he had done.
No Apostolic Succession, no valid Holy Orders, no valid ordinations and thus no valid Eucharist. The only valid Sacraments your clergy possess are Baptism and Matrimony.
Last edited:
T
TULIPed
Guest
I have to say @De_Maria - you do have an interesting take on scripture. A free gift that isn’t absolutely free. That sounds a lot like how the definition of “children” ended up in my life.
M
mcq72
Guest
Sorry but this is all over the place…it is free but then merited and then merit by assistance…so hard to let go of that last fraction of thought that there must be something good, righteous even, in man…that stuborness that says I must have my hands in fixing this as we resew on fig leaves, after God has totally discarded them with covering wrought from blood.
We should have stopped verbiage when we had it right, while holding His cup, uttering, “Lord I am not worthy.”
Last edited:
- Status