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

[guanophore]

so anyone who disagrees with any part of the CC cannot be considered Catholic?

No, but that is grist for another thread! What I would like to explore on this thread is when was Cornelius born again?

If he was born again when he heard the gospel, were the “works” he did prior to that “works of the flesh”?

 

[tweetymom]

Wonderful to see that Jesus has rescued Tweety, yes, but you have been misled that she is “catholic clay”. You have fallen over the same stumblingn block that 2nd has. You have been duped into thinking that it is proper for a person to call themselves Catholic when they reject the Teachings of the Church. It sounds, from Tweety’s testimony, that she has been a very faithful Protestant during all these years, growing in grace. For some reason, at this time in her walk with God, she has found it expedient to represent herself as someone she is not. It is causing a painful scandal here on CAF. Moldable clay, bravo. Misrepresenting the truth, not so much.

Thank you

 

[tweetymom]

so anyone who disagrees with any part of the CC cannot be considered Catholic?

According to the perfect ones here.

 

[PRmerger]

According to the perfect ones here.

Not a single Catholic person on this thread has ever claimed to be perfect when she’s correcting or admonishing you, tweety.

Why must every correction be taken so personally?

We’ve all been at family gatherings when, seemingly, an interesting discussion is being had, and suddenly (usually it’s a female, I must say) jumps up and exclaims, *“Well, since you’re all perfect and think it’s okay to insult me I’ll just take my casserole and leave, thank you very much!” * Everyone else is left mystified by the perceived insult…but, then, the conversation happily continues, but, sadly, next time this family member appears conversation must be stilted and one-dimensional, lest this person take offense at another innocuous remark.

Every family has one member that, unhappy in her personal life, makes everyone else miserable when gathered together.

What’s the saying by Thomas Merton? Something like, “You are not at peace with others because you are not at peace with yourself. You are not at peace with yourself because you are not at peace with God.”

Now, this is not meant as a personal anything to you, tweety. It’s just an observation I’m making.

And before you say, “Thank you!” I’m going to go ahead and pre-empt that with a resounding, “You’re welcome!”

 

[tweetymom]

Not a single Catholic person on this thread has ever claimed to be perfect when she’s correcting or admonishing you, tweety.

Why must every correction be taken so personally?

We’ve all been at family gatherings when, seemingly, an interesting discussion is being had, and suddenly (usually it’s a female, I must say) jumps up and exclaims, *“Well, since you’re all perfect and think it’s okay to insult me I’ll just take my casserole and leave, thank you very much!” * Everyone else is left mystified by the perceived insult…but, then, the conversation happily continues, but, sadly, next time this family member appears conversation must be stilted and one-dimensional, lest this person take offense at another innocuous remark.

Every family has one member that, unhappy in her personal life, makes everyone else miserable when gathered together.

What’s the saying by Thomas Merton? Something like, “You are not at peace with others because you are not at peace with yourself. You are not at peace with yourself because you are not at peace with God.”

Now, this is not meant as a personal anything to you, tweety. It’s just an observation I’m making.

And before you say, “Thank you!” I’m going to go ahead and pre-empt that with a resounding, “You’re welcome!”

Thank you and I have a very happy personal life and am happy as anyone can be. And I have never had that happen at a family gathering. I am at peace with myself and God and I do not need to be admonished by anyone, period except Jesus of course.
I already told you I praise Jesus everytime someone says something to or about me.

As far as anyone acting like they are perfect I have seen this in a lot of post, not just to me but to anyone who disagrees with the Catholic Church. I tell you the truth I have received more PMs from Protestants and Catholic who have been insulted by a number of people here and have left and in their emails to me, have said" If I ever thought about becoming a Catholic these people would sure turn me away" and Catholics that have said" Boy I sure am glad I don’t know any Catholics like that" So dear lady it isn’t me it is other people. I don’t turn away because I am a tough old broad.

 

[PRmerger]

So dear lady it isn’t me it is other people.

:bowdown:

 

[PRmerger]

I If I ever thought about becoming a Catholic these people would sure turn me away" and Catholics that have said" Boy I sure am glad I don’t know any Catholics like that"

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:

[SIGN] So dear lady it isn’t me it is other people.[/SIGN]

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

 

[guanophore]

According to the perfect ones here.

Personal perfection, fortunately, is not a requirement for the recognition of error.

 

[guanophore]

Thank you and I have a very happy personal life and am happy as anyone can be. And I have never had that happen at a family gathering. I am at peace with myself and God and I do not need to be admonished by anyone, period except Jesus of course.
I already told you I praise Jesus everytime someone says something to or about me.

As far as anyone acting like they are perfect I have seen this in a lot of post, not just to me but to anyone who disagrees with the Catholic Church. I tell you the truth I have received more PMs from Protestants and Catholic who have been insulted by a number of people here and have left and in their emails to me, have said" If I ever thought about becoming a Catholic these people would sure turn me away" and Catholics that have said" Boy I sure am glad I don’t know any Catholics like that" So dear lady it isn’t me it is other people. I don’t turn away because I am a tough old broad.

I encourage you to have them post their sentiments publicly, Tweety. It is likely that they have the same issues that you do.

 

[Rocket_Man]

If he was born again when he heard the gospel, were the “works” he did prior to that “works of the flesh”?

We do know that the works he did still missed the target. Else why was Peter called to deliver the Gospel to him?

 

[guanophore]

We do know that the works he did still missed the target. Else why was Peter called to deliver the Gospel to him?

Ok, good. Now we are at the heart of my question. What does it mean to “miss the target” in one’s devotional activities toward God?

 

[Rocket_Man]

Ok, good. Now we are at the heart of my question. What does it mean to “miss the target” in one’s devotional activities toward God?

In Saul’s case, a devout Jew and also blameless under the law, it would have meant chasing down Christians for what he thought were justifed reasons before God.

 

[PRmerger]

I do not need to be admonished by anyone, period except Jesus of course.

Well, then, I guess you do think of someone in these forums as being perfect and not needing correction. Ironic in light of your condemnation of those you perceive as thinking they’re perfect.

I tell you the truth I have received more PMs from Protestants and Catholic who have been insulted by a number of people here and have left and in their emails to me, have said" If I ever thought about becoming a Catholic these people would sure turn me away" and Catholics that have said" Boy I sure am glad I don’t know any Catholics like that".

And, tweety, I know you’re aware that it’s not only Catholics who can be rude. This “saved” and “bible Christian” lady wrote this to me:

Leslie_Polley:

[SIGN]You are truly a moron…[/SIGN]It sstates in LARGE PRINT…All have sinned EXCEPT>>>EXCEPT EXCEPT JESUS…This absolutally proves my point YOU DO NOT READ or your comprehension is null…EXCEPT JESUS>>>GOD>>>THE HOLY SPIRIT>>>>>EXCEPT THEM !!! Romans 3:23 and yeas that incompuses original sin… Sin is sin REAS IT argue with the book of Romans…and don’t say WE are not talking about anything. I posted what the BIBLE said. I, NOT we

(signage only added by me)

 

[guanophore]

In Saul’s case, a devout Jew and also blameless under the law, it would have meant chasing down Christians for what he thought were justifed reasons before God.

Ok, I can accept that. You postulated that Cornelius’ actvities were “missing the mark”, otherwise God would not have sent Peter to preach the gospel to him. Is it possible that God sent Peter there to demonstrate to Peter that the Gospel was meant for the Gentiles, and not because of any lack in Cornelius?

If Cornelius was a “God-fearer” (a Gentile who recognized the Truth in Judiasm), then maybe his practices were consistent with what he was able to do as a Gentile under the old covenant?

 

[Rocket_Man]

Ok, I can accept that. You postulated that Cornelius’ actvities were “missing the mark”, otherwise God would not have sent Peter to preach the gospel to him. Is it possible that God sent Peter there to demonstrate to Peter that the Gospel was meant for the Gentiles, and not because of any lack in Cornelius?

Well, it could be, but why does it have to be one or the other and not both. Didn’t the angel say, “Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved”?

If Cornelius was a “God-fearer” (a Gentile who recognized the Truth in Judiasm), then maybe his practices were consistent with what he was able to do as a Gentile under the old covenant?

Then what shoud we say about Simeon?

Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:

“Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
you now dismissd your servant in peace.
For my eyes have seen your salvation,
which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
a light for revelation to the Gentiles
and for glory to your people Israel.”

 

[guanophore]

Well, it could be, but why does it have to be one or the other and not both. Didn’t the angel say, “Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved”?

Because, according to “total depravity”, there is nothing a person can do before they are regenerated to please God. They are in the flesh, and their hearts are turned away from God.

Then what shoud we say about Simeon?

Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:

“Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
you now dismissd your servant in peace.
For my eyes have seen your salvation,
which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
a light for revelation to the Gentiles
and for glory to your people Israel.”

You have hit the nail on the head. This is exactly my confusion with the total depravity doctrine. If it was not possible to be “born again” prior to Christ, and no one who is not “born again” can please God, how is it that these people engaged in religious activites that seemed to please God?

 

[Timothy_Piper]

I am sorry, I do not see anything in this passage from Paul that indicates any “works based salvation”. I think that Paul is consistently clear that all of our “effort” must emanate from His grace, or it has no eternal value.

Sound like Protestant theology; are you a Catholic in disguise only?
Do you believe you must be baptized to receive saving grace? If so, then you are bound by the works righteousness salvation. Why? Because the moment you say “I must do something in order for God to act toward my own salvation”; then it is no longer God’s salvation.

If a religion has a bunch of you must do this and must do that’s; it is a form of a legalistic righteousness IMO and many others.

Paul’s observation that we don’t attain salvation in this life is not “works based” either. Are you sure you did not respond to the wrong post?

Paul knows the gospel of his salvation and he knew the moment he believed that he was justified before the Lord, saved!

By grace, through faith, and not of works, lest any man should boast.

What do you think the apostle was saying in that passage? How do you read it? What is the “mature” attitude he was proposing for all of us?

You are protestant…

No, you misunderstood me. The Apostles taught that we are justified before God the moment we are born again.

Is justified saved? or not?

Amen! A Catholic verse, written by a Catholic, to Catholics!

This is part of the Apostolic Teaching that illustrates salvation includes justification, sanctification, and glorification.

You miss the whole point of the passage; I did for quite a while myself, but the apostles are always speaking in human and/or God terms or a human perspective or God’s perspective concerning time; this is why we are justified, are being sanctified and will be glorified, this is human terminology. Here is God terminology:
Romans 8 -
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and** these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. ** There is the whole process wrapped up from how God sees it! Isn’t that wonderful?
Once you begin reading Scripture with this in the back of your mind; you will see it throughout the OT and the NT. The difference is from god’s perspective, what He has purposed is as good as though it is already done because where He is, does not have time, but from our earthly perspective we see it from within the “time box” God has us in.

I’ll give you example of where it hits us in the face. When was the present day Christian’s sins forgiven? Past, present and/or future? Most people will say He has forgiven our past (Catholics at baptism) and will forgive when we ask our present sin and if (speaking from a Catholic position) we go to the confessional & do penance, then He will forgive our future sins.

This is not correct, all sins were paid when? At the cross! How long ago was that? 2000 years ago. BTW, this should be the human perspective because from the God perspective; they were paid before the first sin was committed because God purposed it before time. I hope this puts a new light on your Bible reading and study because the truths I have written are profound.

You just did such a fine job here, I can’t think of anything to add. The Gospel, as recorded in the NT is Catholic.

Where does the NT say there is a Catholic gospel? It is not in my Bible; perhaps it lies in the uninspired apocrypha?

 

[Timothy_Piper]

Wonderful to see that Jesus has rescued Tweety, yes, but you have been misled that she is “catholic clay”. You have fallen over the same stumblingn block that 2nd has. You have been duped into thinking that it is proper for a person to call themselves Catholic when they reject the Teachings of the Church. It sounds, from Tweety’s testimony, that she has been a very faithful Protestant during all these years, growing in grace. For some reason, at this time in her walk with God, she has found it expedient to represent herself as someone she is not. It is causing a painful scandal here on CAF. Moldable clay, bravo. Misrepresenting the truth, not so much.

This coming from someone who sounds more Protestant than Catholic…

 

[Timothy_Piper]

No, but that is grist for another thread! What I would like to explore on this thread is when was Cornelius born again?

If he was born again when he heard the gospel, were the “works” he did prior to that “works of the flesh”?

At the same time as all Christians; when they received the HS of promise, when did Cornelius receive that? Acts 10 beginning in verse 34 while Peter was still speaking; this is no coincidence on Gods part; He wanted the Jews that were with Peter, to witness the gentiles receiving exactly what they had received in exactly the same way; therefore there would be no division between “Jewish Christian” and “Gentile Christian”; they were both the same as God and now man saw it. Notice also that Peter, I believe in his wisdome and obviously part of God’s plan, ordered the Jewish converts to baptize the gentiles with water, thus sealing the deal where the Jewish converts could not go back and say well that Peter baptized them all, no the testimony from those Jewish converts will be as God intended, there is no difference they received salvation just as we did. Also note the order, hear, believe, receive the HS, then be water baptized. this is when Cornelious received the HS and his salvation.

 

[Timothy_Piper]

Thank you

Hi Tweety,

Do you not see the condescension you are receiving? Saying “I am glad you are growing in the grace of God, but you are not a Catholic and causing a riff w/in CAF”. This is sarcasm, not sincerity. The only thing worse is that Catholic group that is so liberal they want female priests, most Catholics would not recognize them as Catholic, like yourself, call them “separated brethren” at best after Vatican II and damned before that.

I’m just telling you so you don’t keep getting “played”.

Timothy