I think “foolish” is probably a better descriptor.
I do agree that those that are adopted are adopted on the basis of His proptiation. Not all those for whom He made propitiation are adopted, and not all the adopted are saved.
Well, we go that. What we want to know is, How?
Can you please explain what this means?
If you believe that, it is no wonder you are having so much confusion! It is a good thing what you are asserting is false! On the contrary, what distinguishes the CC from the other denominations is that it is the one about which Jesus said “I will build my Church”.
So, when Jesus said 'he who hears you, hears Me", He didn’t really mean that? He was probably just talking to hear Himself?
Can you show us where in scripture it says that everything to be known about our faith is confined to it’s pages? Can you show me, in support of that, where it says we should worship in Sundays, and that there is such a thing as “Trinity”? can you show us where the “list” is of the books that belong in the Bible?
This makes sense. I guess if you did not hold that opinion, you could not, in clear conscience, be Reformed.
No, it would not be accurate. However, since you have never defined what you meant by “lower view” and now by “higher view”, it is not possible to really respond to your query.
Soli Deo Gloriaok 2nd, i would have to say the HOW the work of Christ is applied, is the main difference between the two camps. let me know if im getting warmer. but you cannot effectively discuss your point without bringing in limited attonement, since you are a calvinist. you believe that you are already saved. whereas the Catholic believes that we are redeemed and are in the process of being saved.(please correct me if im wrong fellow Catholics, since ive not been a Catholic that long.) you believe it is a once and for all cleansing based on your decision to follow Christ. even that is different in differing protestant denominations. but yes we do believe that Christ work is all sufficient, but we must make use of the means of Grace. is this what you are trying to get at? if so it would help move this thread along. God bless you and yours my seperated brother. lol!
If Christ propitiated the sins of the whole world; if Christ paid for all the sins of the whole world at the cross, if unbelief is a sin, then you are preaching universalism. God would be unjust if Christ paid for the sins of the entire world, and later punish the unbeliever in Hell for the same sins Christ already paid for.
What glorifies God is when His creation elects to glorify Him-when they do it because they know -as He does-that He’s worthy of their loving Him with their whole heart, soul, mind, and strength. This is why mans’ free cooperation must be part of the process.
You don’t think unbelief is a sin? If Christ didn’t pay for the sins of the whole world, God would be unjust.
Answer: Both
False logic. First off, Christ paid for the sins of the whole world, not just of select individuals:
That is a meaningless statement. All men are the children of God (Acts 17:28). Adam was the son of God (Luke 3:38). The “adoption” that Paul talks about refers to the regeneration of the sinner that takes place through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. All men are “spiritually dead” in sin because of the Fall. The Atonement has the power to bring them spiritually back to life again trough faith, repentance, and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. That is what is meant by being “born again”. This “new birth” or “second birth” is what the “adoption” is referring to. By this process we are born anew into the household of Christ, and become His sons and daughters.
You make it sound like those two statements are contradictory, or mutually exclusive. They are not. God saves sinners through faith and repentance, and obedience to his laws, including baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. Through His Atonement, Jesus has provided all men the opportunity to saved in this way. No one is barred from being saved by following this procedure if they want to. The choice is theirs. The fact that some fail to take advantage of that choice is not God’s fault. You want blame the failure of some to be saved on God. That is false. The blame rests on them for failing to take advantage of the opportunity that is offered to them by the Atonement. God has allowed them freewill so that they can make that choice for themselves; otherwise how could they be held accountable for their actions in the day of judgment?
The key phrase there is “those who come to God”. They have the freedom to make that choice. If they do they can be saved. If they don’t they can’t.
I think, 2nd, that if you started exploring the differences from a point of Truth we could get further. Starting out from a false premise does not benefit any of us.
This is also a false statement. Where do you get this stuff?
I understand how it appears that way, but it is not. God glorifies Himself through His creation. It pleases Him for us to cooperate with HIm, and to choose Him. The giving of our lives in service to Him is our spiritual worship. It is not for the purpose of glorifying ourselves, but Him.
This is yet another falsehood. I think it is based upon misinformation you have been given. It seems that you have been given to understand that when God lifts people up, and shines through them,that it takes away from His glory. This is not the case. He is able to glorify Himself through His faithful without detracting from His glory.
This is what the Apostles believed and taught. I am glad to know that, even though the Reformed tradition has departed from some significant Apostolic teachings, this is not one of them.
Oh yes, I have witnessed this many times. I have also witnessed, in my many years of work with adopted children, that they spurn the love that brought them home, and go off on their own, making a shipwreck of their lives. some of them get killed in that state of rebellion, and some end up in prison. At that point, the fact that they were adopted is of little practical relevance.
Yes, I would be in agreement with this. It is very sad to see a family get fed up and quit on a kid.
You have reached a false conclusion, based upon a false premise. God never “undoes” His adoption of us. That is why, those that spurn the blood that bought them find themselves in a condition where their last state is worse than the first -it would have been better for them never to have been adopted.
My separated brethren seem to easily notice that this passage is in the past tense. It refers to those who have already been glorified by God. It is not applied to us because, up until the hour of our death, we may still walk away from our heavenly inheritance, and fail to be united with it.
This is another passage that is often misapplied by my separated brethren. For some reason, the Reformed tradition does not see that God’s love involves the setting free of the object of His love. For this reason, He enables and empowers us to choose whether we wish to be in fellowship with Him, or not. This was the choice given at our creation. It is part of what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God. Because God loves us, He allows us to choose to walk (or run) right through the gates of hell. He will honor our decision, and will not stop loving us as we walk away from Him.
Yes, I read this ridiculous notion of yours before. I don’t think I qualified it as a response. Perhaps you would like to define universalism? I understand it it to mean that everyone will be saved.
Well, this is a false conclusion, based upon a false premise. God is not unjust. In His love for His creation, He allows man to choose.
I am not sure what you are asking here. Suffice to say that yes, all who are united to Christ are adopted into His family. Some of them choose to reject the benefits and status of that sonship. It does not make them any less His sons. Look at the Prodigal in the pigpen. It never says he was not any longer a son, does it?
And this is precisely why their last state is worse than the first. They are ontologically changed in baptism, transferred from the Kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of light. If they they choose to spurn the blood that bought them, they are in a “worse” state.
Why do you think the Apostle states this, if it is not possible to fall back into fear?
Indeed. Yet, it is possible for one who has been adopted to practice unrighteousness. It is possible to make a shipwreck of one’s faith, to fall back into fear, to fail to finish the race, be disqualified, and have one’s name blotted out of the book of life.
Both things are true, 2nd. God does save sinners. He gives all men the opportunity to be among the saved.
Thanks for this great post Zerinus. I find it both shocking and refreshing that a Mormon has retained more of the Apostolic teaching on this matter than my Reformed brethren appear to have.
Quick question: Do you believe that Adam had a choice in Original Sin or was it all predestined by God for His glory? I suspect the former but yes, this is very relevant to the debate.
You are very welcome. If you wanted to explore this subject in depth out of all the standard works of the LDS Church, there is a lot more to get your teeth into. In my discussions here I generally tend to quote only from the Bible, because that is what everybody believes in (or claim to). But for your information, here are some additional insights out of LDS scriptures on this subject:Thanks for this great post Zerinus. I find it both shocking and refreshing that a Mormon has retained more of the Apostolic teaching on this matter than my Reformed brethren appear to have.
Adam and Eve definitely had free will to obey the command of God, unlike ourselves. Therefore, Adam and Eve had a choice and ability to obey and please God on their own. We are born with a will that is in bondage to our fallen nature, choosing freely what we desire which is not Christ, but rather we choose sin, rebellion, and death. That is why Christ came, to save us from the penalty of sin, and to free us from our sin nature, changing our wills from the inclination of sin to the inclination of righteousness. All mankind has a choice to come to Christ, but by his own fallen nature, nobody comes to Christ. I think that statement can be embraced by Catholics within the Catholic Faith. After-all, we both embrace Augustine in reagards to original sin and are inability to choose God on own power without the help of God.
He believes it was all predestined! That is what all of them believe in.