"The sufficiency of Grace" a continuation of "The sufficiency of Christ" family debate.

[2nd_Adam]

Hi There,

Yes all men can come to Christ once the Holy Spirit moves upon them. All men are predestined to be a child of God thus they are the elect. He also gives them the right to accept or reject. God as our Father has planned all the good things for us in our journey here on earth, but as with our own children we do not have to recieve it. He loves us with a much wiser and stronger love than we can ever have for our own children. I believe that the Holy Spirit touches all men at some point in time and in some significant way whether or not they recognise it or not, and whether or not they act on it depends on their final outcome in eternity.

Cora

You defintely do not fall into the Catholic Calvinist camp. You think just like my Arminian Protestant brothers.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

A question: Adam’s original sin affected all of humanity, why do you believe that Christ, the New Adam, only died for a part of it?

 

[2nd_Adam]

We certainly give God all the glory but he shares it with us! In other words, God allows us to participate in our salvation. I suspect we disagree on this aspect. Please correct me if I am wrong. To qualify this statement I would say, we cannot do anything without God. Man does not merit even a small portion of his salvation apart from grace. But God graciously enables us to merit salvation through cooperation. God initiates, enables, and sustains; we cooperate.

Our active participation or cooperation in salvation does not detracts from God’s glory, it demonstrates that his Glory is unlimited. The scriptural proof is:

**“and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him,” (Rom 8:17)

“God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thes 2:13-14)

“The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one.” (John 17:22)**

Do you agree with this?

There is of course a unique glory had only by God as the ultimate source and end of creatures. That I’m sure we can agree on.

What keeps you distinctively Catholic and me being distinctively Protestant is our view of justification. Otherwise, we have so much in common. I’m glad you have shared such a solid view which gives God glory in what He has done for wretched sinners like me and you. We can always discuss justification as siblings in Christ. What do you think about my signature?

 

[2nd_Adam]

A question: Adam’s original sin affected all of humanity, why do you believe that Christ, the New Adam, only died for a part of it?

Here’s an old Puritian riddle from John Owen to answer your question:

The Riddle

God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ underwent the pains of hell for,

1. either all the sins of all men,
2. or all the sins of some men,
3. or some sins of all men.

If the LAST, some sins of all men, then have all men some sins to answer for, and so shall no man be saved; for if God entered into judgment with us, though it were with all mankind for one sin, no flesh should be justified in his sight: “If the LORD should mark iniquities, who should stand?” [Ps. cxxx.2] We might all go to cast all that we have “to the moles and to the bats, to go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty.” [Isa. ii. 20, 21]

If the SECOND, that is it which we affirm, that Christ in their stead and room suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the world.

If the FIRST, why then, are not all freed from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, “Because of their unbelief; they will not believe.”

But this unbelief, is it a sin, or not?
If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be, then Christ underwent the punishment due to it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died from partaking of the fruit of his death? If he did not, then did he not die for all their sins.

Let them choose which part they will.
An extract from John Owen’s – The Death Of Death In The Death Of Christ, Book I, Chapter III –

 

[2nd_Adam]

When was Cornelius saved?

I don’t understand the big deal about Cornelius. I was reading this account by a Centurion. Is it similar to Cornelius?

The Faith of a Centurion

5 When he entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, appealing to him, 6 “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly.” 7 And he said to him, “I will come and heal him.” 8 But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9 For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. And I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my servant, [3] ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” 10 When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel [4] have I found such faith. 11 I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, 12 while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” 13 And to the centurion Jesus said, “Go; let it be done for you as you have believed.” And the servant was healed at that very moment.- Matthew 7

 

[Cr8ton]

Hi There,

Yes all men can come to Christ once the Holy Spirit moves upon them. All men are predestined to be a child of God thus they are the elect. He also gives them the right to accept or reject. God as our Father has planned all the good things for us in our journey here on earth, but as with our own children we do not have to recieve it. He loves us with a much wiser and stronger love than we can ever have for our own children. I believe that the Holy Spirit touches all men at some point in time and in some significant way whether or not they recognise it or not, and whether or not they act on it depends on their final outcome in eternity.

Cora

It seems you hold to the position that an elect of God can lose his elected-ness (since you believe all men are elected)

with this view… how do you reconcile these words of Jesus?

Joh 6:39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Joh 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that **no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. **

Joh 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Here’s an old Puritian riddle from John Owen to answer your question:

The Riddle

God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ underwent the pains of hell for,

1. either all the sins of all men,
2. or all the sins of some men,
3. or some sins of all men.

If the LAST, some sins of all men, then have all men some sins to answer for, and so shall no man be saved; for if God entered into judgment with us, though it were with all mankind for one sin, no flesh should be justified in his sight: “If the LORD should mark iniquities, who should stand?” [Ps. cxxx.2] We might all go to cast all that we have “to the moles and to the bats, to go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty.” [Isa. ii. 20, 21]

If the SECOND, that is it which we affirm, that Christ in their stead and room suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the world.

If the FIRST, why then, are not all freed from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, “Because of their unbelief; they will not believe.”

But this unbelief, is it a sin, or not?
If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be, then Christ underwent the punishment due to it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died from partaking of the fruit of his death? If he did not, then did he not die for all their sins.

Let them choose which part they will.
An extract from John Owen’s – The Death Of Death In The Death Of Christ, Book I, Chapter III –

Does God need to send another Savior? Was Jesus, the both God and man, not sufficient to redeem all?

 

[Philthy]

God does not reveal things to to individuals that contradict what He has already in the Scriptures either.

 

[elvisman]

Please help me understand what you meant that “Jesus - he IS the Church” What exactly do you mean by that comment?

I’m glad you asked this - VERY glad, because it exposes the classic Protestant practice of taking things out of context.

What I ACTUALLY said was:
**Jesus – he IS the Church – along with us, his Body. **

Read Acts 9:4-5. Here, Jesus appears to Saul and with a blinding light, knocks him to the ground. What Jesus says to him is VERY telling about how he holds the Church:
**He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?"
He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

Up to this point, Saul had NEVER met Jesus. He was persecuting the early Church, yet Jesus says ". . . why are you persecuting me?"
Here, Jesus EQUATES Himself with His Church.

Hope that helps.
**

 

[izoid]

It seems you hold to the position that an elect of God can lose his elected-ness (since you believe all men are elected)

with this view… how do you reconcile these words of Jesus?

Joh 6:39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Joh 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that **no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. **

Joh 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

Throwing Scripture verses around out of context and apart from the whole of Scripture does no good. For each of your verses Catholics can give one right back to support their teachings. The real challenge is on how do we combine the differences to come to a holistic theology. Catholicism does this, protestantism doesn’t.

 

[guanophore]

I know of many Catholics who proclaim Jesus Christ over and above the Catholic Church.

Well, this activity would represent a misunderstanding of the Apostolic Teaching. Jesus is proclaimed through the Church, and He is glorified through the believers, not apart from them. This is what I mean about that headless body stuff.

Eph 3:6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
Eph 3:7 Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God’s grace, which was given me by the working of his power.
Eph 3:8 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,
Eph 3:9 and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things,
Eph 3:10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places.
Eph 3:11 This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord,
Eph 3:12 in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in him.

You have posted this passage many times, yet you seem to gloss over the part that talks about being members of the Body, and that God’s plan is to be manifested through the church, not apart from it!

ph 1:19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might
Eph 1:20 that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places,
Eph 1:21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.
Eph 1:22 And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church,
Eph 1:23 which is his body,** the fullness of him who fills all in all.**

The Church, His Body, is the fullness of Him who fills all in all. That is why it is not necessary or appropriate to try to separate Him from it.

Jesus identifies himself completely with the Church.

 IMO.... you appear to have greater affection for the Catholic Church than Jesus Christ Himself.

I can understand why it would seem this way, since you separate them, and I do not. I can also see that it would seem this way because our discussion is about differences other than the nature and ministry of Christ. Since we are in agreement about the doctrines of Christ, I have not broached any discussion on Him. I have assumed a lot, but I think it is warranted.

   The Apostles had greater affection for Jesus Christ than the visible church.

This is a sad fact througout history. May we now be otherwise inclined! I don’t think it shows affection for Christ to denigrate His Bride, though, anymore than it does to disrespect His mother!

 

[2nd_Adam]

I’m glad you asked this - VERY glad, because it exposes the classic Protestant practice of taking things out of context.

What I ACTUALLY said was:
Jesus – he IS the Church – along with us, his Body.

Read Acts 9:4-5. Here, Jesus appears to Saul and with a blinding light, knocks him to the ground. What Jesus says to him is VERY telling about how he holds the Church:
He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?"
He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

Up to this point, Saul had NEVER met Jesus. He was persecuting the early Church, yet Jesus says ". . . why are you persecuting me?"
Here, Jesus EQUATES Himself with His Church.

Hope that helps.

Okay

 

[Cr8ton]

If it is lacking in Scripture then it cant contradict Scripture.

lacking as in…not there

Revelation says not to add anything to THIS BOOK (ie The Book of Revelation). So are you saying it is okay for the CC to add or take away any books of the Bible except for Revelations?
Philthy;6001264:

COLOR=Navy]Sorry, there isnt a nice way to say that you need to show a little humility in the area of developmental theology before you can expect others to follow your lead.

I never said I had it all figured out, I come here to discuss our differences in light of Scripture, and I expect to learn as well.

We all need to be honest about our limitations, and recognize that compared to some of the intellectual and spiritual giants that have gone before us we are ants.

I agree.

This sounds like a " semi-pelagian works revelation" to me. Try reading Proverbs 3:5-6

You kind of just supported a view of mine that says God will lead you if you lean on His understanding and NOT on mans understanding a.k.a. Tradition!

 

[2nd_Adam]

Does God need to send another Savior? Was Jesus, the both God and man, not sufficient to redeem all?

You lost me with your thoughts. Jesus was not born with original sin, and Jesus never sinned. I believe in the hypostatic union of Christ; dual natures (fully God and fully man) which cannot commingle in any form. Therefore, in His deity, it would be impossible for Jesus to have sinned. Of course Jesus was sufficient to save all. His work could have redeemned the fallen angels, but the work was not intended for the fallen angels or the non-elect. Which angels did not fall? According to Scripture, the elect angels did not fall.

 

[ryanoneil]

What keeps you distinctively Catholic and me being distinctively Protestant is our view of justification. Otherwise, we have so much in common. I’m glad you have shared such a solid view which gives God glory in what He has done for wretched sinners like me and you. We can always discuss justification as siblings in Christ. What do you think about my signature?

I don’t think it speaks to faith alone. Paul is emphasizing that works must be done in faith, not outside of faith. If they are done outside of faith, we are in a system of debt (God owes us). If they are done in faith (as James 2 requires), we are in a system of grace (God rewards us). Good works performed under God’s grace lead to justification and eternal life.

eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness. Yes, affliction and distress will come upon every human being who does evil, Jew first and then Greek. But there will be glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, Jew first and then Greek. There is no partiality with God. All who sin outside the law will also perish without reference to it, and all who sin under the law will be judged in accordance with it. For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified. (Rom 2:7-13)

We cannot do “works of the law” to obligate God. We are not in a debtor/creditor relationship with God. He owes us nothing. Instead, we are in a Father/child covenant relationship with Him, and He will reward us for being faithful.

 

[izoid]

lacking as in…not there

So are you saying it is okay for the CC to add or take away any books of the Bible except for Revelations?

QUOTE]

How many books are in the protestant Bible? How many in the Catholic Bible?

It was the reformation that lead to the removal of several books that had been in the Bible up to that point. Look into church history and tell me which books were considered canon in 250 AD. Several of them were left out of the protestant Bible.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Well, this activity would represent a misunderstanding of the Apostolic Teaching. Jesus is proclaimed through the Church, and He is glorified through the believers, not apart from them. This is what I mean about that headless body stuff.

Eph 3:6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
Eph 3:7 Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God’s grace, which was given me by the working of his power.
Eph 3:8 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,
Eph 3:9 and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things,
Eph 3:10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places.
Eph 3:11 This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord,
Eph 3:12 in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in him.

You have posted this passage many times, yet you seem to gloss over the part that talks about being members of the Body, and that God’s plan is to be manifested through the church, not apart from it!

ph 1:19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might
Eph 1:20 that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places,
Eph 1:21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.
Eph 1:22 And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church,
Eph 1:23 which is his body,** the fullness of him who fills all in all.**

The Church, His Body, is the fullness of Him who fills all in all. That is why it is not necessary or appropriate to try to separate Him from it.

Jesus identifies himself completely with the Church.

I can understand why it would seem this way, since you separate them, and I do not. I can also see that it would seem this way because our discussion is about differences other than the nature and ministry of Christ. Since we are in agreement about the doctrines of Christ, I have not broached any discussion on Him. I have assumed a lot, but I think it is warranted.

This is a sad fact througout history. May we now be otherwise inclined! I don’t think it shows affection for Christ to denigrate His Bride, though, anymore than it does to disrespect His mother!

There is the visible church and the invisible church. The visible church goes way beyond the Catholic Church.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

You lost me with your thoughts. Jesus was not born with original sin, and Jesus never sinned. I believe in the hypostatic union of Christ; dual natures (fully God and fully man) which cannot commingle in any form. Therefore, in His deity, it would be impossible for Jesus to have sinned. Of course Jesus was sufficient to save all. His work could have redeemned the fallen angels, but the work was not intended for the fallen angels or the non-elect. Which angels did not fall? According to Scripture, the elect angels did not fall.

I never said that Jesus was a sinner nor did I bring up angels. By all, we were taking about humans as referenced in your other posts about men. Can Jesus be called the New Adam if He only died for the elect, only select few of humanity? Whom is God going to send to redeem the rest?

 

[izoid]

So are you saying it is okay for the CC to add or take away any books of the Bible except for Revelations?

How many books are in the protestant Bible? How many in the Catholic Bible?

It was the reformation that lead to the removal of several books that had been in the Bible up to that point. Look into church history and tell me which books were considered canon in 250 AD. Several of them were left out of the protestant Bible.

 

[guanophore]

IMO... evidence of truly being united to Christ is found in our personal affection and love for the person of Jesus Christ.

While I agree with you, this is not a biblical description. Scripture always defines unity as connection with Truth, which, as a by product, brings us into unity with one another. Affrection for Christ is not exclued by any means, but when Jesus prays for unity in John, it is inseparable with being as one mind with one another.

Using this type of standard, one could convince oneself, due to ones overwhelming affection and love for Christ, that he does not need the Body at all, and does not need to work out any of his differences with athe other members. Whereas, the Apostles constantly enjoin us to work out the unity among us, and settle our differences so that we may be of “one mind”.

Because someone has love for the Catholic Church is not really a great sign of being united to Christ.

I understand that it seems this way to you, since you seem to have a Headless Body in mind.

For us, the Body cannot be separated from the Head, nor the Bride from the Groom. We are mystically joined, so that being right with Him makes us right with the Church. Love and affection for Him will result in love and affection for His Holy Bride.

  You can also see this in Protestant churches too, where members love their particular church more than God Himself.  Our assurance of being in the Faith is found in our love and affection for our Triune God, first and forremost.

Actually, I have never personally seen this, but I will take your word for it. I suppose it is possible to make an idol out of anything.

Do you believe the gospel of God is glorious? Do you love God in what He has done for you as revealed in the face of Jesus Christ?

If I do, does that equate to me believing that His grace is sufficient and efficacious?

When was Cornelius saved?