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

[Timothy_Piper]

I am a revert who previously spent three years in an Evangelical Seminary. However, I have never been able to understand Calvanist Theology, and I am trying. Some of my favorite sparring partners on here are Calvanist, so I have learned a lot, but I am still mystified about certain aspects.

No. God commands us to be baptized, and He works through this sacrament, but His grace is not confined to the sacrament. One of the best examples of this is Cornelius, who received saving grace and was filled with the HS.

He commands us to make an outward identification of his burial, death and resurrection, that is different than if you do this for me, than I will do this for you; that is the OT covenants that Israel could not keep their part; the New Covenant is different; it is all of God, that is what distinguishes it from everything else. The Old covenants were based on law; which only brings witness of sin and condemnation. The New Covenant is based on all of Grace.

Besides, the fact that God works through physical matter to convey His grace does not equate to “works righteousness”. Your concusion is false, with regard to us doing something. Scripture states “as many as received Him”. This is our part.

You miss the entire point of grace; who is it that gives the spiritual gifts, some to serving, some to teaching etc; it is all of God.

Let me demonstrate further. If you are blind, and Jesus applies mud to your eyes, and tells you to go wash in a pool, and you do so, and receive your sight, was this healing “works based”? I think you will agree it is not. Though Jesus may attach certain physical or action steps to His grace, it does not make the “works based”. His grace and healing are not predicated upon our actions, but upon His mercy.

It was Jesus doing the work, the blind man believed Him based solely on what “faith”; it is all of God.

Well, then you and the others would be misled. Freedom is not the license to act wrongly, but the ability to follow God’s commandments. The fact that there are many things we must do to lead an upright and God glorifying life does not mean that our faith is “legalistic”. We act in righteousness because of His grace, not because of our own abilities.

Again you do not understand God’s grace; in this case His irresistible grace; when He removes the veil that prevents one form seeing God for who He is and the sinner for who He is; when the veil is removed the sinner will repent, will receive mercy and will hunger and thirst after his righteousness and this is a gift as well. The legalistic religions always have rites or rituals that MUST be performed in order to have god act; that is not New Covenant grace. A person that has fully received His grace will want to please Him and it is god that empowers that person to do so; it is all of God. This is why we say you cannot lose your salvation because the New Covenant is a one sided agreement based on His grace, through faith in Christ. There will not be a single legalistist in the Kingdom of God. Legalism comes in all kinds of forms, but the tall tale sign is I must perform this act and that act and then God must move…no; grace does not work that way.

Our freedom in Christ is not a license to sin; those in Christ are new creations. There are false doctrines of grace that say i said a prayer, i believe IN God and they continue to live just as they did before; this person is the total opposite of the legalist and is no Christian at all because although you will continue to commit sin while in a sinful vessel, your spiritual renewal will more and more overcome the battle over the flesh. Paul gives a great testimony about Himself in regards to this. “It is no longer I that sin, but the sin that dwelleth in me” .

People just do not understand His grace; it is the gospel of grace. They either try to add to it or minimize it by making that profession and living as though nothing happened because nothing did happen.

Yes, and he also knew that he was working out his salvation throughout this life, and that it would not be completed in this life.

No, but Protestant theology has retained a large amount of Apostolic Teaching, this included.

Yes and no. It marks the beginning of one’s walk with God, and the onset of sanctification which has, at it’s end, eternal life.

Yes, of course! However, the Apostle here is using the past tense, and with it he describes those persons for whom this has already been completed. We see some examples in Heb. 11. However, all of this is not yet complete in us.

Yes, this much has become clear to me in my conversation with my Calvanist brethren. They read all of scripture through these lenses, and it changes their understanding of it. However, I am under the apostolic commandment to preserve what has been entrusted to the Church, and that frame of reference is a significant departure from what they believed and taught.

 

[Rocket_Man]

Ok, we are in agreement on this point. What I don’t understand in this is that my Reformed brethren tell me that the person is totally depraved, and that all his works are as “filthy rags” until he is regenerated. Do you see my quandary here?

Even the beginning act of someone coming to Christ so we may have life is tainted with our own unpure motive to self preserve. Yet, our beginning work isn’t His ending work. For where we once worked for our own good, we now work for His Glory, so the Word of God is not blasphemed.

 

[Timothy_Piper]

So then, the doctrine of total depravity states that man can do nothing to please God in his natural state. How is it then that this man had faith? He wasn’t yet “saved” was he? Was Cornelius an exception? After all, he was not yet saved but his works of faith were pleasing to God.

" But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ" - Eph. 2

The “US” are the redeemed.

I swear; if you all could learn and comprehend the meaning of the Parable of the Soils", then you would understand exactly how God works His grace in whom He chose.

Got to get some zzzz’s - Good night and thanks for the good conversation and Lord willing will we continue.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t understand the difference with Cornelius and Abraham?

Honestly, I don’t either. If man is unable to please God until he is regenerated, then how did any of the OT saints please God? If man in his natural state is totally turned away from (at emnity) with God, and no one was born from above until NT, how were they able to walk according to God’s will? Do you understand my difficulty here?

 

[guanophore]

Love thy neighbor as thy self - Period.

We love Tweety just fine. We love her enough to make it clear to her that she is misrepresenting herself as a Catholic, and that she has separated herself from communion by her rebellion against the Teachings of the Church. We love her enough to tell her when she is creating a scandal by misrepresenting the Bride of Christ, causing a stumbling block to other believers. It was not very pleasant for me to hear it either, when it was my turn.

 

[guanophore]

You do not have the mind of Christ;

Don’t you think it is presumptuous to make this kind of judgement about anyone on the forum?

the Faith is a gift of God’s grace; He purposed the centurion. It wasn’t the works that pleased God or has ever pleased God; it is a HEART of belief,

We are in agreement on this point. Where I am haivng trouble is that Holy Scripture specifically references his deeds. I recognize that they are a reflection of his heart, but how can a person who is not regenerated believe and act in a way that is pleasing to God if they are totally depraved?

Act 10:31 and said, 'Cornelius, your prayer has been heard and your alms have been remembered before God.

This seems to say that God noticed Cornelius actions (prayer and alms) BEFORE he was regenerated. How does this fit together with the doctrine that such a persons’ heart is turned against God?

true belief; that kind of Faith God uses to display His glory in the works He predetermined that the saved would wlk in them to demonstrate through that believer His glory, which resides in the person of faith is the form of the HS.

If this is true, then why does anyone need to be born again? If the faith of Abraham can exist in all hearts in the form of the HS prior to regeneration, then what is the point?

Are you saying that people can have this kind of faith before they are regenerated?

It has always been this way with God; it is by Faith alone, trusting in Him with your heart alone, receiving His grace as His sovereign act alone.

You did not answer my question, Tim. However, I will agree with you that salvation has always been by grace, through faith, and not of works, lest any man should boast. But none of those in Heb. 11, nor was Cornelius saved by “faith alone”. All of them had actions that demonstrated their faith.

This is why those that live by rituals and legalism in the past and the present will never be justified before God on those basis. It is also the reason why these types of religions never have any real security in salvation and for good reason according to the Bible.

Ues,. we are om agreement on this point. However, it is not the religion itself that is the problem, but the heart of the participant. We can see that God loves rutual and law, or He would not have created so much of it for the Jews. God made man so that he functions best with these structures. However, I agree with you that if one puts one’s faith in the Structure, rather than the Creator of it, it becomes a form of godliness without the power thereof.

 

[2nd_Adam]

We love Tweety just fine. We love her enough to make it clear to her that she is misrepresenting herself as a Catholic, and that she has separated herself from communion by her rebellion against the Teachings of the Church. We love her enough to tell her when she is creating a scandal by misrepresenting the Bride of Christ, causing a stumbling block to other believers. It was not very pleasant for me to hear it either, when it was my turn.

The Catholic version of fruit inspector, maybe?

 

[guanophore]

He commands us to make an outward identification of his burial, death and resurrection, that is different than if you do this for me, than I will do this for you; that is the OT covenants that Israel could not keep their part; the New Covenant is different; it is all of God, that is what distinguishes it from everything else. The Old covenants were based on law; which only brings witness of sin and condemnation. The New Covenant is based on all of Grace.

Scripture never describes baptism as and “outward identification”. This is a modern American Evangelical conception, not even shared by the Reformers. It Reforms even the Reformation doctrine!

In fact, there is quite a bit of language in the NT that is conditional (if you do this, then I will do that). The presence of conditions does not mean it is any less grace. If it was 'all of God", then why would there be any conditional statements at all?

Jesus could have said a word, or laid His hands upon the blind man. Why use mud?

 You miss the entire point of grace; who is it that gives the spiritual gifts, some to serving, some to teaching etc; it is all of God.

The responsibility for receiving and maintaining the gifts does not make them any less gifts. Please explain where my plantation analogy is wrong.

It was Jesus doing the work, the blind man believed Him based solely on what "faith"; it is all of God.

I agree, but why did Jesus command the man to go wash in the pool? If he had refused, do you think he would still be healed? Why would a person refuse to obey the conditions, if one believed in faith a good result? You did not explain how it is any less "grace’ if the man had to participate by his own choice.

 Again you do not understand God's grace; in this case His irresistible grace; when He removes the veil that prevents one form seeing God for who He is and the sinner for who He is; when the veil is removed the sinner will repent, will receive mercy and will hunger and thirst after his righteousness and this is a gift as well.

When was Cornelius’ “veil” removed?

If grace is irresistable, how come some people resist? Why did Stephen chide the Pharisees for resisting God’s grace? If they had no choice, why criticize them? They are only fulifilling their God appointed task to be vessels of wrath.

The legalistic religions always have rites or rituals that MUST be performed in order to have god act; that is not New Covenant grace.

I have never heard of anything like this. It sounds like some kind of “magic”.

 Legalism comes in all kinds of forms, but the tall tale sign is I must perform this act and that act and then God must move...no; grace does not work that way.

I will accept your definition of Legalism. This is not consistent with anything the Catholic Church Teaches, but I will acknowledge that it is possible. Not sure where?

People just do not understand His grace; it is the gospel of grace.

The fact that there are things accompanying grace does not mean they “add” to grace. Jesus chose to work through mud and water to heal the blind man, but that does not mean these elements “added” to grace. They were the physical elements God chose through which to work His grace.

 

[Rocket_Man]

Honestly, I don’t either. If man is unable to please God until he is regenerated, then how did any of the OT saints please God? If man in his natural state is totally turned away from (at emnity) with God, and no one was born from above until NT, how were they able to walk according to God’s will? Do you understand my difficulty here?

They were all children of the promise.

 

[Rocket_Man]

If grace is irresistable, how come some people resist? Why did Stephen chide the Pharisees for resisting God’s grace? If they had no choice, why criticize them? They are only fulifilling their God appointed task to be vessels of wrath

Stephen was on trial. Not only did he criticize them, he turned the tables on them making his accusers the ones on trial and charging them with the murder of all the prophets and ultimately Christ.

“Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.”

 

[guanophore]

" But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ" - Eph. 2

The “US” are the redeemed.

Right. My difficulty is with those who do “live” things before they are regenerated. Cornelius’ case does not seem to reconcile with the doctrine of total depravity. If Cornelius was “dead intransgressions” before he was born again, how is it that his faith and his actions were pleasing to God?

I swear; if you all could learn and comprehend the meaning of the Parable of the Soils", then you would understand exactly how God works His grace in whom He chose.

I don’t have any differences with you on the fourth seed (perseverance of the saints). My difficulty is with the middle two, that sprouted, then did not persist.

Mar 4:13 And he said to them, "Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables?
Mar 4:14 The sower sows the word.
Mar 4:15 And these are the ones along the path, where the word is sown: when they hear, Satan immediately comes and takes away the word that is sown in them.
Mar 4:16 And these are the ones sown on rocky ground: the ones who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with joy.
Mar 4:17 And they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while; then, when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately they fall away.
Mar 4:18 And others are the ones sown among thorns. They are those who hear the word,
Mar 4:19 but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful.

The word is “sown in them”, then snatches away, in the one case, in th eother, jtey hear, and “receive with joy”. How can one do that except by grace? And if they receive the implated word with joy, how can it be said they are not saved by it? How do they endure for a while? Are not those who are unregenerate at enmity with God? In order for them to be “choked out”, they have to have grown first.

**

Timothy_Piper:
Got to get some zzzz’s - Good night and thanks for the good conversation and Lord willing will we continue.**

As I do myself. Finals going on! I appreciate your help. Although I still do not have clarity, it seems as though I am making incremental progress. I appreciate your patience.

 

[guanophore]

The Catholic version of fruit inspector, maybe?

Actually, I think very little of Tweety’s fruit, just as with all of us, is evident here. As you have correctly noted, it is very difficult to communicate via forum, and much gets lost. I surmise that Tweety is very serious about her faith, and that she is the kid of woman that is very vexed with wrongdoing. Her accounting of examples where birth control might be appropriate on the other thread demonstrates that her heart is grieved when loved ones walk in a manner that is not pleasing to God. If she were not a testimony of faith and commitment, her parish priest would not encourage participation in RCIA as he does. Since her pastor sees more of her than we do, I think it would be best to defer to his judgement on the matter of fruit. I gather he has inspected her fruit and found it very good!

 

[po18guy]

The Catholic version of fruit inspector, maybe?

Matthew 18:15 and Luke 17:3. Correction of an errant brother or sister is an act of love. Someone who openly and persistently dissents from Church teaching offends the Body of Christ. Anyone who offends a part of the Body offends the entire Body (1 Corinthians 12:14-19). This is also true in the case of someone who is untruthful (John 8:44), or equivocates, as anything more than “yes” or “no” is from the evil one (Matthew 5:37).

 

[ncgolf]

I believe the definition of love you gave is in fact one that would accompany this heart felt love I spoke of. So we are in agreement that both of these “types” if you will, of love are involved when saving faith is granted. perhaps you will say the second isnt necessary but I believe anyone who has the kind of love you spoke of will also have strong feelings for whom it is they love.

To base faith on feelings of love is to build it on sand. How does one love your enemy then … you see my point. You cannot love one’s enemy as much as one’s children if this is based on feelings.

 

[izoid]

I don’t understand the difference with Cornelius and Abraham?

I think if you read James you will better understand. I found it very interesting that James declared Abraham’s righteousness by his works. I do not believe that works saves but it is clear that it plays a part. The problem we have is that protestants attempt to separate the two, faith and works. Catholics embrace both and therefore develop a complete theology.

 

[izoid]

So in your thinking ; it make sit right? Love thy neighbor as thy self - Period.

Then why do you come on these boards and try to straighten us Catholics out. Are you not bound by your same standards?

Tweety publicly professes teachings that are against the Church that she professes to belong to. When we challenge her on those beliefs there is nothing unloving against it. In fact, it is the Biblical thing to do, isn’t it?

 

[izoid]

You do not have the mind of Christ; the Faith is a gift of God’s grace; He purposed the centurion. It wasn’t the works that pleased God or has ever pleased God; it is a HEART of belief, true belief; that kind of Faith God uses to display His glory in the works He predetermined that the saved would wlk in them to demonstrate through that believer His glory, which resides in the person of faith is the form of the HS.

It has always been this way with God; it is by Faith alone, trusting in Him with your heart alone, receiving His grace as His sovereign act alone. This is why those that live by rituals and legalism in the past and the present will never be justified before God on those basis. It is also the reason why these types of religions never have any real security in salvation and for good reason according to the Bible.

As far as the mind of Christ comment, you really have no idea what my “mind” is. Considering your support of a heretical Catholic you really are mislead my friend. YOu would do well to adhere to your same advice.

Regarding faith alone. I would like to look at these verses from the book of James:

James 2:21-24
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God.
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

You tell me that “faith alone” is what saves man but here in James, v. 24, we are told that it is not faith alone. If we are to understand this correctly, what should we do? I think it is very important to understand what it is that James is saying. He certainly is not contradicting other scripture by saying that the works of man lead us to being justified but he is not saying that faith alone justifies. I know how the Catholic Church and the apostles understood this, how do you?

 

[izoid]

You do not have the mind of Christ; the Faith is a gift of God’s grace; He purposed the centurion. It wasn’t the works that pleased God or has ever pleased God; it is a HEART of belief, true belief; that kind of Faith God uses to display His glory in the works He predetermined that the saved would wlk in them to demonstrate through that believer His glory, which resides in the person of faith is the form of the HS.

It has always been this way with God; it is by Faith alone, trusting in Him with your heart alone, receiving His grace as His sovereign act alone. This is why those that live by rituals and legalism in the past and the present will never be justified before God on those basis. It is also the reason why these types of religions never have any real security in salvation and for good reason according to the Bible.

As far as rituals and legalism, I agree to a point. No one is saved through them but many people find the rituals very helpful in knowing Christ better. After all, it was God who established many rituals for those who loved Him to follow. God understands that man has a tendency to wander and that certain, God given, rituals help man to focus on Him more fully.

Legalism is mans attempts to be made right before God apart from His graces. THis is not glorifying to God. I must say that I have found far more legalism in my protestant experiences than I have in the Catholic Church. I thank you for reminding me of the freedom that I have found in God’s true Church.

 

[izoid]

Again you do not understand God’s grace;

Timothy, I am seeing this type of language in many of your posts. I would challenge you to consider that maybe it is you that does not understand. I comes across as arrogant and condescending when you begin your arguments in this manner.

 

[tweetymom]

This is from the woman who seems to thinking judging others is the worst win ever? And now you’re advocating these people who supposedly PM’d you that *they’re judging Catholics *by the folks here at CAF?

:tsktsk:

That is a very interesting take on the world, tweety. There’s nothing wrong with ME–it’s everyone else!!

I did not say that. I am not judging you or anyone else. Iwas just telling the truth about some of the PMs i have recieved. Why would I lie? Just telling you that some people take offence to your tone . And questions like this is the FBI.