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

[Timothy_Piper]

Oh,you would be surprised. In fact, I would say that the majority of shame comes from a lack of understanding.

Did I say something previously that hurt your feelings? This invalidating remark seemed to come out of the blue right now, so I am thinking there must have been a previous post that left you insulted, and you are seeing to it that I reap what I sowed.

Sorry - poor communication; it is a question. I will rephrase it. How can anyone who does not know nor understand be ashamed of the gospel to which one does not know nor understand? I don’t think they can, but I may have misunderstood the original post as well. Either way; I apologize for my miscommunication; you have done me no harm nor insulted me that I am aware of. :imsorry:

 

[Timothy_Piper]

I could show scriptural report, but I’d rather let John Piper… lol

There is a falling away of some believers, but if it persists, it shows that their faith was not genuine and they were not born of God.

l John 2:l9, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be made plain that they all are not of us.” Similarly, the parable of the four soils as interpreted in Luke 8:9-l4 pictures people who “hear the word, receive it with joy; but these have no root, they believe for a while and in a time of temptation fall away.”

The fact that such a thing is possible is precisely why the ministry of the Word in every local church must contain many admonitions to the church members to persevere in faith and not be entangled in those things which could possibly strangle them and result in their condemnation.

God justifies us on the first genuine act of saving faith, but in doing so he has a view to all subsequent acts of faith contained, as it were, like a seed in that first act.

What we are trying to do here is own up to the teaching of Romans 5:l, for example, that teaches that we are already justified before God. God does not wait to the end of our lives in order to declare us righteous. In fact, we would not be able to have the assurance and freedom in order to live out the radical demands of Christ unless we could be confident that because of our faith we already stand righteous before him.

Nevertheless, we must also own up to the fact that our final salvation is made contingent upon the subsequent obedience which comes from faith. The way these two truths fit together is that we are justified through our first act of faith because God sees in it (like he can see the tree in an acorn) the embryo of a life of faith. This is why those who do not lead a life of faith with its inevitable fruit of obedience simply bear witness to the fact that their first act of faith was not genuine.

The textual support for this is that Romans 4:3 cites Genesis 15:6 as the point where Abraham was justified by God. This is a reference to an act of faith early in Abraham’s career. Romans 4:l9-22, however, refers to an experience of Abraham many years later (when he was 100 years old, see Genesis 21:5, l2) and says that because of the faith of this experience Abraham was reckoned righteous. In other words, it seems that the faith which justified Abraham is not merely his first act of faith but the faith which gave rise to acts of obedience later in his life. (The same thing could be shown from James 2:21-24 in its reference to a still later act in Abraham’s life, namely, the offering of his son, Isaac, in Genesis 22.) The way we put together these crucial threads of biblical truth is by saying that we are indeed justified through our first act of faith but not without reference to all the subsequent acts of faith which give rise to the obedience that God demands. Faith alone is the instrument (not ground or basis) of our justification because God makes it his sole means of uniting us to Christ in whom we “become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

-John Piper

The parable of the soils is not about Christians who fell away; it is about professors exposed to the gospel, but because they have “NO ROOT”, which is Who, they are merely professing a faith they do not possess. However, the 4th soil received the Word and produced fruit; the true mark of a Christian because they “Have Root”. Notice the soils represent the hearts of those receiving the seed, which is the Word. Also notice that the only heart that is able to produce is the one that was carefully prepared before hand, by Who? Also notice that it is not the sower that counts as far as who is saved or not, but only the heart that was prepared by God to hear, receive and believe by Faith.

This was a good lesson for the Apostles because it let them know with certainty that there job is to put out the seed, the messengers, and it is God’s job to prepare the heart to receive the gospel. Jesus also said that if you can understand this parable, then the rest will also fall into place (paraphrased).

 

[guanophore]

There is a falling away of some believers, but if it persists, it shows that their faith was not genuine and they were not born of God.

l John 2:l9, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be made plain that they all are not of us.” Similarly, the parable of the four soils as interpreted in Luke 8:9-l4 pictures people who “hear the word, receive it with joy; but these have no root, they believe for a while and in a time of temptation fall away.”

In order for the heretics to go “out”, they had to at least have had the appearance of being “of us”. The seeds sprouted, and began to grow. This cannot happen without regenerative grace.

What do you think was at the root of the separation described here?

The fact that such a thing is possible is precisely why the ministry of the Word in every local church must contain many admonitions to the church members to persevere in faith and not be entangled in those things which could possibly strangle them and result in their condemnation.

Do I understand you correctly that you do believe it is possible to fall from grace? Even a “true believer”?

God justifies us on the first genuine act of saving faith, but in doing so he has a view to all subsequent acts of faith contained, as it were, like a seed in that first act.

Yes, as the seed, so the plant grows.

What we are trying to do here is own up to the teaching of Romans 5:l, for example, that teaches that we are already justified before God. God does not wait to the end of our lives in order to declare us righteous. In fact, we would not be able to have the assurance and freedom in order to live out the radical demands of Christ unless we could be confident that because of our faith we already stand righteous before him.

This is very Catholic, you know.

This is what Catholics call being in a “state of grace” (justified/in right relationship with God).

Nevertheless, we must also own up to the fact that our final salvation is made contingent upon the subsequent obedience which comes from faith. The way these two truths fit together is that we are justified through our first act of faith because God sees in it (like he can see the tree in an acorn) the embryo of a life of faith. This is why those who do not lead a life of faith with its inevitable fruit of obedience simply bear witness to the fact that their first act of faith was not genuine.

I agree with this all except for the last part. Jesus nowhere indicates that the first sprouting of the seed lacks authenticity.

The textual support for this is that Romans 4:3 cites Genesis 15:6 as the point where Abraham was justified by God. This is a reference to an act of faith early in Abraham’s career. Romans 4:l9-22, however, refers to an experience of Abraham many years later (when he was 100 years old, see Genesis 21:5, l2) and says that because of the faith of this experience Abraham was reckoned righteous. In other words, it seems that the faith which justified Abraham is not merely his first act of faith but the faith which gave rise to acts of obedience later in his life. (The same thing could be shown from James 2:21-24 in its reference to a still later act in Abraham’s life, namely, the offering of his son, Isaac, in Genesis 22.) The way we put together these crucial threads of biblical truth is by saying that we are indeed justified through our first act of faith but not without reference to all the subsequent acts of faith which give rise to the obedience that God demands. Faith alone is the instrument (not ground or basis) of our justification because God makes it his sole means of uniting us to Christ in whom we “become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

-John Piper

Interesting stuff, thanks.

 

[Cr8ton]

This is what Catholics call being in a “state of grace” (justified/in right relationship with God).

interesting, glad we share that similarity =]

I agree with this all except for the last part. Jesus nowhere indicates that the first sprouting of the seed lacks authenticity.In order for the heretics to go “out”, they had to at least have had the appearance of being “of us”. The seeds sprouted, and began to grow. This cannot happen without regenerative grace. What do you think was at the root of the separation described here? Do I understand you correctly that you do believe it is possible to fall from grace? Even a “true believer”?

The root of separation is that these aren’t truly the elect.
If someone is truly elect, they will not fall from grace.

l John 2:l9, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be made plain that they all are not of us.”

Here its shown **if **they (who went out) was of us (elect) **they would have **continued with us

also please consider…

l Corinthians 15:1,2, “Now I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received, in which you stand, by which you are saved,** if you hold it fast–unless you believed in vain**.”​

Colossians 1:21-23, “And you, who once were estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him, provided that you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel…”

2 Timothy 2:ll,l2, “The saying is sure: If we have died with him, we shall also live with him; if we endure, we shall also reign with him…”

Mark 13:13, “But he who endures to the end will be saved.”

See also Revelation 2:7,l0,ll,l7,25,26; 3:5,ll,l2,2l.

Faith alone is the instrument (not ground or basis) of our justification because God makes it his sole means of uniting us to Christ in whom we “become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

God works to cause his elect to persevere.

We are not left to ourselves and our assurance is very largely rooted in the sovereign love of God to perform that which he has called us to do. l Peter 1:5, “By God’s power we are guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.”

Jude 24,25, “Now to him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you without blemish before the presence of his glory with rejoicing, to the only God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.”

l Thessalonians 5:23-24, “May the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful, and he will do it.”

Philippians 1:6, “And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.”

l Corinthians 1:8-9, "Jesus Christ will sustain you to the end; guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord."

Therefore we should be zealous to make our calling and election sure.

2 Peter 1:10, "Therefore, brethren, be the more zealous to confirm your call and election, for if you do this you will never fall; so there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ."

-Cited from John Piper

So as you can see Catholic and Calvinist beliefs are more similar than most think, I think its all about recognizing where the distinctions are and recognize they are in different places. Calvinist believe if someone is truly elect they will endure to the end, but thats not to say they aren’t meant to evangelize, strive to be holy, enduring to the end, being sanctified ect. Those are all by-products of being an elect.

Therefore it is safe to say none of God’s elect will be lost.

 

[Cr8ton]

found an interesting quote on John Piper’s website about Augustine and thought I’d share it:

Augustine

Augustine was resoundingly converted by the irresistible grace of God after leading a dissolute life. He wrote in his CONFESSIONS (X, 40):

I have no hope at all but in thy great mercy. Grant what thou commandest and command what thou wilt. Thou dost enjoin on us continence…Truly by continence are we bound together and brought back into that unity from which we were dissipated into a plurality. For he loves thee too little who loves anything together with thee, which he loves not for thy sake. O love that ever burnest and art never quenched! O Charity, my God, enkindle me! Thou commandest continence. Grant what thou commandest and command what thou wilt.

These are the words of a man who loves the truth of irresistible grace, because he knows he is utterly undone without it. But also in his doctrinal letters he drives this beloved truth home (Epistle ccxvii, to Vitalis):

If, as I prefer to think in your case, you agree with us in supposing that we are doing our duty in praying to God, as our custom is, for them that refuse to believe, that they may be willing to believe and for those who resist and oppose his law and doctrine, that they may believe and follow it. If you agree with us in thinking that we are doing our duty in giving thanks to God, as is our custom, for such people when they have been converted…then you are surely bound to admit that the wills of men are preveniently moved by the grace of God, and that it is God who makes them to will the good which they refused; for it is God whom we ask so to do, and we know that it is meet and right to give thanks to him for so doing…

For Augustine the truth of irresistible grace was the foundation of his prayers for the conversion of the lost and of his thanks to God when they were converted.

www.desiringgod.org

 

[guanophore]

Wrong I do not take anything personl from you.

Beloved sister Tweety, it may be that your dishonesty with your affiliation is not isolated. It may be that you are not entirely honest with yourself, either.When I observed that you were putting a stumbling block in front of others by claiming to be Catholic, yet rejecting the teachings of the Church, you responded thus:

And I for one have been more than insulted by your condescending attitude

I thank you everytime you say my name in vain.

It is a fact that people do not get upset over things that are not important to them. Therefore, it is clear that my feedback to you is not in vain.

 

[guanophore]

Sorry - poor communication; it is a question. I will rephrase it. How can anyone who does not know nor understand be ashamed of the gospel to which one does not know nor understand? I don’t think they can, but I may have misunderstood the original post as well. Either way; I apologize for my miscommunication; you have done me no harm nor insulted me that I am aware of. :imsorry:

Ok. I asked 2nd Adam a question, and he replied by quoting me the verse “…I am not ashamed of the gospel…”, so I asked him if he was implying that I was ashamed of the gospel (previously he has stated that I do not know the gospel, because I am Catholic). You jumped in with what seemed like a rhetorical question about “how can someone be ashamed of what they don’t know”. I thought you were joining in on 2nd Adam’s insult to me (that I do not know the gospel). I have a lot of clarity about why he insults me like this, because he explained it thoroughly. In your case, I was not sure.

Thank you for clarifying.

The other question about Adam pertains to a persistent question of mne that 2nd seems to avoid, and I was hoping someone else could help me with 2nd says that we are made in the “image of fallen Adam”. I think this is an important element with regard to the nature and effects of original sin, but I am not sure what he means by it.

 

[tweetymom]

Beloved sister Tweety, it may be that your dishonesty with your affiliation is not isolated. It may be that you are not entirely honest with yourself, either.When I observed that you were putting a stumbling block in front of others by claiming to be Catholic, yet rejecting the teachings of the Church, you responded thus:

It is a fact that people do not get upset over things that are not important to them. Therefore, it is clear that my feedback to you is not in vain.

Yes I was at first insulted by you, but have since allowed God to work in my heart and no longer am I insulted. I am pleased when you say things about or to me. Your oponion is not important to me, but Jesus is and I don’t think you are even close to that.,

Your feedback is only important to yourself and once again I thank you.

 

[izoid]

Yes I was at first insulted by you, but have since allowed God to work in my heart and no longer am I insulted. I am pleased when you say things about or to me. Your oponion is not important to me, but Jesus is and I don’t think you are even close to that.,

Your feedback is only important to yourself and once again I thank you.

I would like to share something with you Tweety. As a revert back to the Catholic Church, I found your posts here to be quite confusiing at first. You positions really did lead me to wonder what it was that the Catholic Church really taught. After all, you were a teacher in RCIA and had your priests blessings so I was truly confused. It was only after searching posts that I realized that your personal beliefs on many issues do not align with those of the Catholic Church.

You need to be aware of the impact of what you do and say. I for one, was lead astray by your comments. It was only because of my intellectual curiosity that I was able to properly discern where you deviated from official Church teaching. Not every one that reads your posts will have that same level of curiosity.

For you to continue to profess Catholocism while blatantly disreagarding Her teachings is shamefull. You can claim that you give all the glory to God when you are criticized but the reality is that your staunch rejection of correction is not bringing glory to God. I find it to be quite disappointing. You are the one that is attacking the Church, not the other way around.

 

[guanophore]

The parable of the soils is not about Christians who fell away; it is about professors exposed to the gospel, but because they have “NO ROOT”, which is Who, they are merely professing a faith they do not possess.

We are in agreement about the “no root” part. However, Jesus says that they received the Word with joy. Since the seed sprouted, something happned! The seed of faith cannot sprout in the human heart without supernatural grace. These people got born again, but did not grow in faith. They did not put down a root.

However, the 4th soil received the Word and produced fruit; the true mark of a Christian because they “Have Root”…, but only the heart that was prepared by God to hear, receive and believe by Faith.

All the seeds are the same, would we agree? In three of the four cases, the seed germinates. Now, once a seen falls into the ground and dies, it can never return to being a seed. It has forever changed. I don’t see that scripture makes any such distinction as a “true believer”. Is this in contrast to an equally unscriptural term of “false believer”?

 it is God's job to prepare the heart to receive the gospel.

I agree, but it is the responsibility of the one who receives the Word to respond. It is up to us to cooperate with God’s grace in putting down a root. We are to apply ourselves to the teaching, to prayer, to study and show ourselves approved. Otherwise, the cares of this world will sweep us away, or we will fall in persecution.

 

[guanophore]

So as you can see Catholic and Calvinist beliefs are more similar than most think, I think its all about recognizing where the distinctions are and recognize they are in different places. Calvinist believe if someone is truly elect they will endure to the end, but thats not to say they aren’t meant to evangelize, strive to be holy, enduring to the end, being sanctified ect. Those are all by-products of being an elect.

Therefore it is safe to say none of God’s elect will be lost.

I agree with you, and I don’t see anything here that is contrary to Catholic Teaching. 2nd says what separates us is the doctrine of justification. Catholics believe we are involved in it, anc Calvin says we are not.

 

[guanophore]

I would like to share something with you Tweety. As a revert back to the Catholic Church, I found your posts here to be quite confusiing at first. You positions really did lead me to wonder what it was that the Catholic Church really taught. After all, you were a teacher in RCIA and had your priests blessings so I was truly confused. It was only after searching posts that I realized that your personal beliefs on many issues do not align with those of the Catholic Church.

You need to be aware of the impact of what you do and say. I for one, was lead astray by your comments. It was only because of my intellectual curiosity that I was able to properly discern where you deviated from official Church teaching. Not every one that reads your posts will have that same level of curiosity.

For you to continue to profess Catholocism while blatantly disreagarding Her teachings is shamefull. You can claim that you give all the glory to God when you are criticized but the reality is that your staunch rejection of correction is not bringing glory to God. I find it to be quite disappointing. You are the one that is attacking the Church, not the other way around.

I thank you for sharing this perspective Izoid. I really believe, in her heart, Tweety wants to please Jesus. Down in there somewhere she knows that misleading people and puttting a stumbling block in front of others is not pleasing.

 

[elvisman]

Yes elvis I do know but at the time I didn’t. My sponsor and others at my Church explained it all to me, so now I know. I also know that when I needed my Baptismal records from my childhood church the secreatry told me she couldn’t find any record and said “it’s not like it means anything to your salvation.” At that moment I knew how very important Baptismal was. I told her in a very shaky voice that it meant something to me.
For some reason she got busy and in a few hours called me saying she found the records and made arrangements to mail them to me. I can tell you that peace of paper was precious to me. Technicaly I was still Protestant but spiritually I wasn’t.

See Ya,

Cora

Well, I’m sorry that you had to put up with that sort of indifference from the church secretary. At least you’re home!
God Bless.

 

[tweetymom]

I would like to share something with you Tweety. As a revert back to the Catholic Church, I found your posts here to be quite confusiing at first. You positions really did lead me to wonder what it was that the Catholic Church really taught. After all, you were a teacher in RCIA and had your priests blessings so I was truly confused. It was only after searching posts that I realized that your personal beliefs on many issues do not align with those of the Catholic Church.

You need to be aware of the impact of what you do and say. I for one, was lead astray by your comments. It was only because of my intellectual curiosity that I was able to properly discern where you deviated from official Church teaching. Not every one that reads your posts will have that same level of curiosity.

For you to continue to profess Catholocism while blatantly disreagarding Her teachings is shamefull. You can claim that you give all the glory to God when you are criticized but the reality is that your staunch rejection of correction is not bringing glory to God. I find it to be quite disappointing. You are the one that is attacking the Church, not the other way around.

I am not attacking anyone, but thank you. I did tell you that I DONOT teach doctrine.

 

[tweetymom]

I thank you for sharing this perspective Izoid. I really believe, in her heart, Tweety wants to please Jesus. Down in there somewhere she knows that misleading people and puttting a stumbling block in front of others is not pleasing.

Thank you again!

 

[Cr8ton]

I agree with you, and I don’t see anything here that is contrary to Catholic Teaching. 2nd says what separates us is the doctrine of justification. Catholics believe we are involved in it, anc Calvin says we are not.

Guan, if I may ask some questions to help us make a major distinction between Catholicism and Calvinism.

Would you consider yourself devoted to God and willing to do all He has commanded of you?

Do you ever see a possibility of your turning completely against God and committing mortal sin?

 

[Dancelittleewok]

found an interesting quote on John Piper’s website about Augustine and thought I’d share it:

Augustine

Augustine was resoundingly converted by the irresistible grace of God after leading a dissolute life. He wrote in his CONFESSIONS (X, 40):

I have no hope at all but in thy great mercy. Grant what thou commandest and command what thou wilt. Thou dost enjoin on us continence…Truly by continence are we bound together and brought back into that unity from which we were dissipated into a plurality. For he loves thee too little who loves anything together with thee, which he loves not for thy sake. O love that ever burnest and art never quenched! O Charity, my God, enkindle me! Thou commandest continence. Grant what thou commandest and command what thou wilt.

These are the words of a man who loves the truth of irresistible grace, because he knows he is utterly undone without it. But also in his doctrinal letters he drives this beloved truth home (Epistle ccxvii, to Vitalis):

If, as I prefer to think in your case, you agree with us in supposing that we are doing our duty in praying to God, as our custom is, for them that refuse to believe, that they may be willing to believe and for those who resist and oppose his law and doctrine, that they may believe and follow it. If you agree with us in thinking that we are doing our duty in giving thanks to God, as is our custom, for such people when they have been converted…then you are surely bound to admit that the wills of men are preveniently moved by the grace of God, and that it is God who makes them to will the good which they refused; for it is God whom we ask so to do, and we know that it is meet and right to give thanks to him for so doing…

For Augustine the truth of irresistible grace was the foundation of his prayers for the conversion of the lost and of his thanks to God when they were converted.

www.desiringgod.org

Augustine sounds like he was talking about actual grace as opposed to irresistible grace. It should be pointed out that before the Council of Trent that there was no distinction between actual grace and santicifying grace, but that doesn’t mean that free will or based on our own efforts. Actual grace is a “supernatural help of God for the salutary acts granted in consideration to merit of Christ.” Actual grace helps the soul desire to good, enlightens the intellect, etc. but it doesn’t override free will. Grace (sanctifying or not) must be accepted and acted upon by soul with God’s help.

Here is what the Catechism says:

2000 Sanctifying grace is an habitual gift, a stable and supernatural disposition that perfects the soul itself to enable it to live with God, to act by his love. Habitual grace, the permanent disposition to live and act in keeping with God’s call, is distinguished from actual graces which refer to God’s interventions, whether at the beginning of conversion or in the course of the work of sanctification.

Here’s an excerpt from Summa Theologica about the division of grace.

 

[Cr8ton]

Augustine sounds like he was talking about actual grace as opposed to irresistible grace. It should be pointed out that before the Council of Trent that there was no distinction between actual grace and santicifying grace, but that doesn’t mean that free will or based on our own efforts. Actual grace is a “supernatural help of God for the salutary acts granted in consideration to merit of Christ.” Actual grace helps the soul desire to good, enlightens the intellect, etc. but it doesn’t override free will. Grace (sanctifying or not) must be accepted and acted upon by soul with God’s help.

Here is what the Catechism says:

Here’s an excerpt from Summa Theologica about the division of grace.

So you believe its possible for someone to resist Actual grace?

If you do, I would challenge you to look at your own life and see how compelled you are to not resist it but in fact pursue the things of God all the more.

This is what I believe to be a work of God that man would never ever WANT to resist even though his free will would technically allow it, it would never ever happen because no one would ever WANT to. (This is assuming the individual is one of the elect and has been drawn to saving faith in Christ by the irresistible grace of God.)

this doesn’t mean we are kept perfect and sinless, but that we endure until the end unto salvation through His enabling Grace.

 

[tweetymom]

So you believe its possible for someone to resist Actual grace?

If you do, I would challenge you to look at your own life and see how compelled you are to not resist it but in fact pursue the things of God all the more.

This is what I believe to be a work of God that man would never ever WANT to resist even though his free will would technically allow it, it would never ever happen because no one would ever WANT to. (This is assuming the individual is one of the elect and has been drawn to saving faith in Christ by the irresistible grace of God.)

aMEN!

 

[Dancelittleewok]

So you believe its possible for someone to resist Actual grace?

If you do, I would challenge you to look at your own life and see how compelled you are to not resist it but in fact pursue the things of God all the more.

This is what I believe to be a work of God that man would never ever WANT to resist even though his free will would technically allow it, it would never ever happen because no one would ever WANT to. (This is assuming the individual is one of the elect and has been drawn to saving faith in Christ by the irresistible grace of God.)

this doesn’t mean we are kept perfect and sinless, but that we endure until the end unto salvation through His enabling Grace.

Yes, man desires good is an effect of the actual grace. Man, with his free will, may choose lusting after his co worker is better–it feels to “good” to have sexual arousal. Mankind, with the free will, can decide if he wants God or lust. He is capable of both with free will. No one would ever want to choose evil in itself but rather do it the apparent gain he sees in it.