The Five Points of Calvinism or TULIP

[lagerald24]

Does it matter if reference to Christ being our rock is plentiful. Could the reference to building the church on this rock actually be on the teachings of Christ alone?

That’s a very good point and a valid one. In 1st Corinthians 3:11, Paul calls Christ “the only foundation of the Church” and he also says that “the Rock was Christ.” In Ephesians 2:20, Paul tells us how the Apostles themselves are the foundation of the Church. Also, as I have shown earlier, it is very clear that Jesus does indeed call Simon “Rock” or Peter. So, how do we reconcile these three points? Well, we must keep in mind that Biblical metaphors can be used in various and differing ways, describing different people and reflecting their attributes. The same metaphor can be used to convey certain truths about individuals.

I think that a quick reference back to Old Testament prophecy really clears up the question at hand. In Isaiah 22:22, we read of Israel’s chief steward. Back in those ancient times, the king of a land had absolute and sovereign rule over his kingdom. However, the king would also have a chief steward who would oversee the kingdom in place of the king usually in the king’s absence. Isaiah Chapter 22 shows us how the wicked steward Shebna was replaced by the upright Eli’akim. We read in verse 22 of that same chapter that Eli’akim would have “the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.”

Okay, so what does all of this mean? Well, in the Church, Christ is the Sovereign King like in Isaiah. Simon Peter is the chief steward appointed by the king to oversee his domain in His absence. Peter and his successors in no way, shape, or form rival or compete with Christ as if they were equal kings. Rather, the Popes receive the gift of being a Divinely-appointed steward of the Christ the King in this world. Even a quick look at the Early Church Fathers confirms this idea of Peter’s supremacy in Christ’s Church, like in the writings of Tertullian, Cyprian, Jerome, Ambrose, and Augustine.

The bottom line is this: Christ is the Supreme Lord and King of the Universe and His Church. Peter and his successors have a special calling to minister to and guide the Church in this world, this vocation coming from Christ Himself. Hope this is helpful!

 

[lagerald24]

Did not the apostles spread out to all areas, all directions sharing the promises of Christ.

They sure did. However, unlike denominations today, they preached one and the same Gospel, the Gospel revealed to the Apostles who were headed by Simon Peter who is the Chief Steward appointed by Christ to be the head and guide of the Church.

Why would Rome think they were the correct church.

I don’t think we should view this like denominations and churches today. Rome was recognized in the early Church as the special headquarters in a sense of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. The other individual Catholic churches spread throughout the world aren’t inferior to the one in Rome. Rather, they all profess the same faith as revealed to the Apostles headed by Peter and the same faith which is passed on to the successors of Peter, the popes who reside in Rome and from there guide the Universal Church.

 

[MichaelP3]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

I saw this cool toon on Facebook. Posters can share their opinions!

 

[lagerald24]

That hat!

Yeah, this point came up earlier at the start of the thread. The idea that our righteous works are pointless or don’t please God is rooted in a misunderstanding of Isaiah 64:6. Isaiah isn’t talking about all good works but only a certain kind of works in that time which didn’t please God. We believe that works performed with, in, and through Christ are truly pleasing to God. After all, as Eph. 2:10 says, “we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” This idea of the Calvinists is flawed, mainly because they have an inadequate view of the Catholic position.

Merry Christmas one and all!

 

[MichaelP3]

We believe that works performed with, in, and through Christ are truly pleasing to God.

Maybe I am asking a question “out of here” but what would you mean with pleasing to God?

Is it that he is happy now or something more? And most importantly what is that more? Or otherwise stated, what would that change or not in our God?

Actually the very Question I would like answered is "How do I as a mere human being PLEASE a God how we think he is. And before anyone just answers, please please think about that for just a moment as honestly I do not think many actually do. THINK and think for a moment by yourself how YOU will please a God! And then we go further.

Personally I am inadequate to please a God. But maybe that is just me …

 

[lagerald24]

Okay, I see what you’re saying. Well, it’s a definite fact that God cannot change; He is immutable. What I mean is that sin, which separates us from God, is obviously not pleasing to God. On the other hand, works done in Christ are pleasing to God. It’s kind of a mystery, I definitely admit. God doesn’t have mood changes like we do, going from happy to mad and such. Ultimately, God wants us to be in union with Him through Christ and does NOT want us to sin against Him and thus separate ourselves from His perfect goodness and love. The phrase “pleasing to God” or “not pleasing to God” can be tricky to understand. We should be sure to understand the concepts of sin and of righteousness and how they relate to us.

 

[lagerald24]

God as our loving Father only wants what is best for us. Sin, being evil, imperfect, and separating us from God, is hateful in the sight of God. This truth does not deny the fact that God is immutable. Rather, it acknowledges the fact that there is sin that can destroy the life of God that is present in our soul. We should think of sin as something that separates us from an all-loving God who only wants the good for us. Sin cries out against an all-perfect God and is thus justly punishable by Him.

 

[Marp]

Heck ya, Jesus depended on Peter to spread the good news. Definition of Peter- rock, Used to refer to someone or something that is extremely strong, reliable, or hard.definition of Catholic - Universal, including or covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception Rock, Did he not give the apostles clear orders also? Mark 16:15-16
15 And He said to them, “Go into all the worldand preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. Does this verse hold weight from the word of God. They went further across Europe, India and Asia. Bartholmew to Asia, John to India, Mathew to Iran, Phillip to Turkey, Thomas to Iran. Is the history of the Catholic Church important?

 

[lagerald24]

Is the history of the Catholic Church important?

It is for sure and it has long been understood that the Universal Church had its headquarters in Rome where the successor of Peter resides as a pastor of that worldwide Church.

 

[Marp]

With such a chaotic and divided world does God call on us to worship with or focus on similarities with Christians to share our light to the world or are our differences center stage. With the Catholic Church declining and The Christian Church is growing rapidly in China and Iran. Is it a race or are we in this together. Romans 8:25-30. 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.

26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for usthrough wordless groans. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.

28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who[a] have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified;those he justified, he also glorified.

 

[Marp]

Can an evil pope rule the church?

 

[lagerald24]

With such a chaotic and divided world does God call on us to worship with or focus on similarities with Christians to share our light to the world or are our differences center stage.

That is a very good question and you make a very good point. I totally agree that we should all seek unity and understanding with other denominations of Christianity. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus. We live as Christians in a world that is hostile to our faith and our common beliefs. We should and must unite against the heinous evils in this world and promote the message of Jesus Christ. In saying this, I do not deny the fact that Christ established but one, visible Church with a visible steward, namely Peter and his successors. I believe that this One Faith is the One Faith that Jesus delivered to the Apostles to hand on through the ages which the gates of Hell will not prevail against. As with anyone who has a great gift, we as Catholics desire to lead everyone to the greatest gift ever: FULL communion with Jesus Christ through the One Church He has established.

 

[lagerald24]

Can an evil pope rule the church?

Yes, an evil pope can rule the Church. We as Catholics believe that the pope has been granted the God-given gift of infallibility which prevents him from leading the Church into error. However, the grace of infallibility does not prevent the pope from sinning gravely or from leading a life of bad example. Even Peter, the first pope and steward of God’s kingdom, denied Jesus, not just once but three times. Peter also was rebuked by Paul for refusing to dine with the Gentiles, thus setting a bad example for the new Christians. These instances don’t deny that the pope is the steward of the Church nor do they deny the fact that he is given the grace of infallibility. The history of the papacy does indeed have many bad men and it has many good men who were passionate for the faith and who even were tortured and executed for it. In the end, we have the promise of Christ that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church and lead the Church into heresy. This promise does not mean that the pope will be an impeccable man of virtue but rather that he is indeed the successor of Peter. The evil sins of previous popes are heinous and they will be accountable before God for their actions. We must not forget, however, that our Church is greater than just a mere human institution. Rather, its origins are truly divine and are not dependent on the conduct of their human leaders. Hope this clarifies any misunderstandings!

Peace of Christ!

 

[Marp]

Thank you and the Peace of Christ to you also. As an apologetic you might be interested in Ravi Zacharius’s ministry called RZIM. Not catholic but interesting. :hugs:

 

[Anti-Theist]

I don’t think you’ll be able to refute the P… predestination. Sam Harris who has studied the brain to quite some degree, gives lectures on Free Will, or rather the lack of it. He demonstrates that there is no good mechanism to escape from a predetermined life. We certainly have the ILLUSION of free will, but to have it would mean that, if you rewound time for the entire universe (megaverse?) to one particular point in your life and arranged every quark and electron just as it was before, that you could somehow cheat physics and come to a different conclusion than you had the first time. Our cells and sensory perceptions are too tied to the physics of our being to swerve off the freeway of fate. It is this notion, of course, which destroys Christianity. How can God condemn a sinner for behaving in the only manner which was available to him? If I have denied Christ, it is only because the series of naturally occurring events in my path have convinced me that it is the right thing to do.

 

[Marp]

Yes Sam Harris…

 

[lagerald24]

Thanks! I’ve listened to some of Ravi’s lectures before. He’s a very good apologist and has some very valid points. Merry Christmas to you and a Happy New Year!

 

[lagerald24]

I don’t think you’ll be able to refute the P… predestination.

Nor will I since I believe in Predestination by an all-powerful God, the Creator and King of the Universe. We Catholics just differ from the Calvinists in regards to HOW God predestines. It appears that you believe in materialistic determinism which denies free will as well. However, my Calvinist brethren DO NOT deny free will for the reasons you do.

I think we should keep in mind that there are always many possible courses of action for a human being. Unlike animals and other forms of organic life, we have the ability to consider, comprehend, and deliberate. We have an intellect, which has the power of knowing, and a will, which has the power of choosing. I don’t think modern science squares with the idea that you present. A person’s choices aren’t only affected by their psychological makeup. Also, as some have said, that man is, for good or for bad, what his brain cells make him. That DEFINITELY does NOT square with the facts of modern science. It’s quite obvious that brain cells are just brain cells. A human being’s innate intellect and will are things that belong to man by nature; We as Christians believe that God gave humans these abilities when He created us.

Also, outside influences like the manner in which a person was raised or whether or not a person’s mother took drugs DOES NOT completely influence one’s decisions. If they did, then we would expect people in similar conditions to all act in the same, predictable way. People do not act in this way and thus we can conclude that there is more to our actions than just some brain cells and electronic impulses.

Anyhow, thanks for the comment @anti-theist. I encourage you to look more into this topic and maybe even call into Catholic Answers Live, especially Trent Horn who gave a lecture at a conference on this topic.

Peace!

 

[Anti-Theist]

So, I just listened to the debate which you linked to, and I think Harris gives every bit as good as he gets. As the guest, he doesn’t have the ability to steer the conversation, but he fielded some very difficult questions with lucidity and panache. This is where the blog experience actually excels. It’s fun to hear their voices in real time, but it would be better to for Praeger to ask, “What do you think about ‘x’” and allow Harris to respond with being talked over, interrupted, and redirected.

Thank you for the link though… Harris is right… we all place our faith in humanity, the question is, do we place it with superstitious ancients who aren’t even who they pretended to be, or more learned realists of the present day? To me, the answer is obvious.

What do I mean “…who aren’t even who they pretended to be?”

Ingersoll to the rescue:

"Many centuries after Moses, the leader, was dead many centuries after all his followers had passed away—the Pentateuch was written, the work of many writers, and to give it force and authority it was claimed that Moses was the author.

We now know that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses.

Towns are mentioned that were not in existence when Moses lived.

Money, not coined until centuries after his death, is mentioned.

So, many of the laws were not applicable to wanderers on the desert—laws about agriculture, about the sacrifice of oxen, sheep and doves, about the weaving of cloth, about ornaments of gold and silver, about the cultivation of land, about harvest, about the threshing of grain, about houses and temples, about cities of refuge, and about many other subjects of no possible application to a few starving wanderers over the sands and rocks."

And he continues on explaining how we know the other books weren’t written by who is claimed.

(Robert G. Ingersoll, About the Bible, 1894)

 

[Anti-Theist]

If they did, then we would expect people in similar conditions to all act in the same, predictable way.

But our future is based on ALL of our past. None of our brains are exactly the same size, shape, etc. Region ‘A’ in my brain is bigger than yours, but region ‘B’ in yours is healthier because I’ve suffered a concussion, etc.

A human being’s innate intellect and will are things that belong to man by nature.

However true that may be, if you have identical twins with identical abilities, adopt one out at birth to Bill Gates, and adopt the other to a ghetto in East St. Louis, I suspect it is pretty easy to predict what is going to happen. Sure, their a slim chance Gate’s kid will grow up to be a spoiled brat and lead a life of crime while his brother struggles to become a successful entrepreneur, but statistically, you could make bank on betting who the more successful was going to be. We are shaped by our environment, by our parents and relatives, by our friends… we are the products of our environment which perfectly explains the slave-owning Christians of the Civil War era, etc.