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

[ncgolf]

LOL… internal fighting from within Catholics on Catholic Answers. I told you the Catholic Church has the same disunity found in all churches.

I really think you have no concept of what “unity” or “disunity” is. Disunity is not everyone agreeing likewise unity is not simply everyone agreeing.

Unity comes from Christ and for Catholics that reality is the Eucharist … that is where our unity is built, … this unity allows Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans all worshipping yet … albeit differently.

This unity allows for monks who eschew all contact with the world and Mother Teresa’s order whose mission is all about contact with the world. Unity allows for this range for the center is Christ … and that Christ is the Eucharist.

If we had the unity you seem to infer … we would be voting for our pastors to either stay or go … we would be agreeing we like Father A and do not wish Father B to preach to us any more. Our disunity then would come from the congregation not agreeing that Father B should go.

No Eucharist … no Unity …and even this is my opinion.

 

[izoid]

PLEASE Izoid! Let us try to stay focused here. Let’s focus on the sufficiency of grace. I think that 2nd believes that any righteousness in man comes from man, which is why he calls it “personal righteousness”. This is at the heart of some of our differences with our Reformed brethren.

If you read my post more closely, you will see I am refuting his view of sola scriptura. This position IS what separates us form our protestant bretren. Until they realize that the Church has teaching authority we will never come to resolution. You already see it in Adam. Any time we make ground, he bails on the discussion due to his faith in Scripture. Until that issue is resolved we will have a very difficult time making any true progress.

 

[izoid]

PLEASE Izoid! Let us try to stay focused here. Let’s focus on the sufficiency of grace. I think that 2nd believes that any righteousness in man comes from man, which is why he calls it “personal righteousness”. This is at the heart of some of our differences with our Reformed brethren.

No, Adam does not believe that there is ANY righteouness in man apart from that which God bestows on him.

 

[guanophore]

Let me go ahead andpost the concluding paragraph for you:

The split of the Protestant Reformation began when a Catholic discovered a Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book. It can end only when both Protestants and Catholics do the same thing today and understand what they are doing: discovering a Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book.

Maybe some day, you too will discover this Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book.

This is my hopeful prayer and expectatation also, Izoid. thank you for pointing this out.

 

[izoid]

LOL… internal fighting from within Catholics on Catholic Answers. I told you the Catholic Church has the same disunity found in all churches. Our visible churches are a mix of the remnant and the goats, causing great friction. In addition, the remnant chosen by grace all know in part, and are great sinners in process too.

I am telling you Guan, you need to know your opponent better than you know yourself. You played right into his hands. Very unfortunate.

Adam has been refusing to discuss anything, constanly sidetracking and diverting. Insulting and making outlandish claims about what the Catholic Church believes and all I was doing was calling him on it.

The only way to get anywhere with him is to hold his responsible for ALL that he says. If he is going to throw an off comment about sola scriptura into a post he needs to called on it. If he throws an odd comment about birth control or Mary or Bible reading, we need to call him on it and hold him accountable.

I know it is frustrating and tedious but it needs to be done or he will continue to twist and contort or words and our beliefs.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Originally Posted by izoid
Let me go ahead andpost the concluding paragraph for you:

The split of the Protestant Reformation began when a Catholic discovered a Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book. It can end only when both Protestants and Catholics do the same thing today and understand what they are doing: discovering a Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book.

Maybe some day, you too will discover this Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book.

This is my hopeful prayer and expectatation also, Izoid. thank you for pointing this out.

This is my hope and prayer for all of my Catholic siblings in Christ. Of course, it comes from a superior source than yours.

For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, 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. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all. - Paul

:knight1: :slapfight::blackeye::flowers::hug1: :harp:

 

[izoid]

LOL… you have been rebuked by your Catholic sibling Guan twice for pestering me. Listen to him, because he has been a Catholic much longer than you have. I have no idea if you are done with RCIA yet? Are you really Catholic, or are you a wanna be Catholic?

If you were able to answer any of my questions you would not need to resort to personal attacks, but hey, that is OK with me. Keep it up as it only reflects on your character, not mine.

 

[izoid]

I really think you have no concept of what “unity” or “disunity” is. Disunity is not everyone agreeing likewise unity is not simply everyone agreeing.

Unity comes from Christ and for Catholics that reality is the Eucharist … that is where our unity is built, … this unity allows Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans all worshipping yet … albeit differently.

This unity allows for monks who eschew all contact with the world and Mother Teresa’s order whose mission is all about contact with the world. Unity allows for this range for the center is Christ … and that Christ is the Eucharist.

If we had the unity you seem to infer … we would be voting for our pastors to either stay or go … we would be agreeing we like Father A and do not wish Father B to preach to us any more. Our disunity then would come from the congregation not agreeing that Father B should go.

No Eucharist … no Unity …and even this is my opinion.

Very nice post, thank you.

I can assure you, Guan and I are united in our theolgy and loyalty to Christ and His bride.

 

[2nd_Adam]

If you were able to answer any of my questions you would not need to resort to personal attacks, but hey, that is OK with me. Keep it up as it only reflects on your character, not mine.

You still never posted that you an actual member of the Catholic Church. I keep bringing that up since several of you continue to hound Tweetymom… the dear 71 year old Catholic great grandmom. That’s okay, because you never really attended a Reformed Calvinist Church by your own definition. How do you find time to work with all of your participation on this thread?

http://remembercliffside.com/images/small_fotos/hound_dog_small.jpg

“I will continue to hound those Catholics who do not believe just like me, the staunch Catholic” - The staunch hound dogs on CA

 

[izoid]

So, with that definition, I guess you never attended a Calvinist church, correct?

This sounds familiar, are you a tape recorder?

 

[izoid]

You still never posted that you an actual member of the Catholic Church. I keep bringing that up since several of you continue to hound Tweetymom… the dear 71 year old Catholic great grandmom. That’s okay, because you never really attended a Reformed Calvinist Church by your own definition. How do you find time to work with all of your participation on this thread?

Does post #374 sound familiar to you? It should as I have directed you there several times as have several other individuals that are posting to this thread. Go read it and then come back here and appologize for you slander and lies about me being a Catholic.

I think you need to take a long look at your motives and methods Adam. They are truly dishonest.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Originally Posted by izoid
I said that Tweety’s doctrine and moral beliefs are not consistent with the Catholic Church and I stand by that.

Post 436

Thank you too for your most gracious post. One thing you do not know one thing about my morals. Glad that you can stand for something.

http://www.everwonder.com/david/tweety/mug.gif

I will always come to the defense of my dear sister in Christ

 

[zerinus]

Adam, I think I can stipulate that when Adam procreated, the effects of his “fallen” state became part of his procreation.

Are you able to stipulate that, when Adam reproduced, the result still contained the image and likeness of God? If we can each do this, I think we can move on.

The answer to that question depends on what you understand by “image”. If I created a statute that looked exactly like you, I could say that that statute was made “in your image”. But that would not mean that it has every attribute that you possess. You can walk and talk and think; but that statute can’t. So when I say that that statute was made “in your image,” it does not mean that it has every attribute that you possess. It means that it just looks like you. Similarly, when God says that He made Adam in His image, it does not mean that Adam possessed every attribute that God has—otherwise Adam would have been God! So what does it mean? That is the key question. Well, I believe that means, firstly, that it looked like Him. In other words, it means that God is in the human form. This of course is fully attested by the rest of the Bible. Wherever God had appeared to man visibly, it has always been in the human form. The ultimate example of this of course was Jesus Christ who was God, and said that whoever had seen Him had seen His Father. So that is the first thing that it means by image. Second, I think that it means that He had some of the attributes of God, such as the ability to think, reason, and make decisions on the basis of those reasons. That is what is meant be being made in the image of God; and none of that changed as a result of the Fall. Adam and his posterity were still every bit in the image of God after the Fall as they had been before it.

 

[izoid]

I would have hoped that Christians could have come together and discussed differences in doctrine in a kind and God honoring way. It is clear to me that some people can, thanks Guan and littleewok, and I apppreciate your attempts to bring this and other threads back to center. I am sorry that I get carried away and caught up in all of this because it really is what I so gladly left in the protestant church. I guess it is hard for me to sit back and read the posts of an individual who feels so superior to everything we Catholics believe. I see so much of my old self in him and I hate it.

That being said, I am sorry if I have offended any of my brothers or sisters in Christ. I certainly do not want to be dragged back into the protestant hostility, whether towards Catholics or other protestants, that I so eaglerly left behind.

 

[ryanoneil]

That sounds pretty good to me! I told everyone that being a Catholic Calvinist, or a Calvinist catholic (me) is a good place to be. I’m not sure if the word "wills everyone to be saved is the best translation. I believe the world "wills should be subsituted as “desires”.

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man [1] Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. 7 For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. - Paul

1 Tim 2:4 translates “wills” in my bible but I don’t see the difference. Salvation and damnation come from the same unchangable will of God. There is no contradiction to say God wills all men to be saved, but consequently wills some to be damned as a punishment for their rejection of His grace.

 

[2nd_Adam]

1 Tim 2:4 translates “wills” in my bible but I don’t see the difference. Salvation and damnation come from the same unchangable will of God. There is no contradiction to say God wills all men to be saved, but consequently wills some to be damned as a punishment for their rejection of His grace.

I think will is a big word. We can discuss about the sovereign will of God, in which through divine providence, all God sovereignly wills does come to pass. We can discuss hidden will, or permissive will too. The word desires is quite different than wills, depending on what we mean by wills. However, I think we are very close in our theology. If we try to take Scripture seriously, there is much to wrestle with.

What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
Rom 9

 

[ryanoneil]

Originally Posted by ryanoneil
I suspect we have two different definition of sufficient grace.

God’s grace is entirely sufficient. He wills everyone to be saved and gives all persons sufficient grace to be saved. If a person is predestined to heaven the God also gives them efficacious grace (final perseverence). In either case, the person is free to accept or reject the grace. But in the case of the elect, God wills that person to infallibly accept the efficacious grace, without taking away his freewill.

That sounds pretty good to me! I told everyone that being a Catholic Calvinist, or a Calvinist catholic (me) is a good place to be. I’m not sure if the word "wills everyone to be saved is the best translation. I believe the world "wills should be subsituted as “desires”.

Do you believe that God gives all persons sufficient grace?

In other words, do you believe that all have the possibility of salvation?

 

[Cr8ton]

And that my friends is the protestant life. It is all about what the INDIVIDUAL reads, sees and feels. This is not the picture of the Church in the Bible. The Biblical picture of the church is not of individual experience but as unity, unity on par of that of Jesus ad the Father. See John 17.

My experience was a result of the truth of Holy Scripture…

If your tradition seems to nullify this, I would be extremely cautious as what you submit to as authority.

 

[ryanoneil]

I think will is a big word. We can discuss about the sovereign will of God, in which through divine providence, all God sovereignly wills does come to pass. We can discuss hidden will, or permissive will too. The word desires is quite different than wills, depending on what we mean by wills. However, I think we are very close in our theology. If we try to take Scripture seriously, there is much to wrestle with.

Feel free to explain the different terms.

What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
Rom 9

What are your thoughts on this scripture?

I see a comparison of God’s will and our will.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Originally Posted by ryanoneil
I suspect we have two different definition of sufficient grace.

God’s grace is entirely sufficient. He wills everyone to be saved and gives all persons sufficient grace to be saved. If a person is predestined to heaven the God also gives them efficacious grace (final perseverence). In either case, the person is free to accept or reject the grace. But in the case of the elect, God wills that person to infallibly accept the efficacious grace, without taking away his freewill.

Do you believe that God gives all persons sufficient grace?

In other words, do you believe that all have the possibility of salvation?

I think we have to understand that God commands all men everywhere to repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for forgivness, reconcilation and adoption. Therefore, all who come to Christ will find that Christ is sufficient as the source of eternal forgivness, reconcilation and adoption. Now, I believe you have gone farther than that basic truth and used the word efficacious grace (final perseverence) given only to the elect, correct?