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

[guanophore]

** Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified**

The Apostle writes of those who have been united with their heavenly inheritance.

 

[Rocket_Man]

I can understand why it is difficult. You have been contaminated with a deficient soteriology.

I hate it when I have to run to a dictionary to know what a word means.

It really does seem like you don’t understand. If you are willing, you might be able to come to understand. Or, if you just want to evangelize Catholics, you can ignore what the Church really teaches, and cling to your misunderstanding.

Earlier in this thread, we talked about the two candlesticks. All I saw was the second candlestick backlighting the first. Explain it to me differently if I’m wrong.

“I think the difference is Catholic’s using the second candle (God working in us) to back light the first candle (God’s work done for us) as if the first candle’s flame isn’t perfect enough to keep the candle glowing.”

I often wonder why this verse applies this way to Protestants, but not to Catholics? How come we are not allowed to do this? Is it because we are Catholic

I really hope that you do apply the “working out” as “pursuing”. But I tend to see the verse copied and pasted here on CAF by Catholics to crush the “always saved” position.

 

[guanophore]

There is nothing I want more that to hear of your love for Jesus. Because I know that all else flows from this love. Without it all of life is meaningless. Do you believe that you could ever walk away from this love that you have?

Oh yes. People walk away from the love of God every day.

 

[Rocket_Man]

No, actually, what you have been sharing is your perception of it, which is a significant departure from what the Apostles believed and taught.

Tell me where the departure is in the story.

When I was received into the loving arms of our Lord, Jesus Christ, it didn’t come with any strings attached. He didn’t say that He would take me only if I promised to agree to "go sin no more”. I knew who I was, for the Living Word had showed it to me. I was lazy, sinful, and selfish. I was King! Knowing who I was and how I had lived previously, how could I ever uphold any commitment to try to start back over and live a life without sin if something inside me didn’t change too? And His answer to that question was His promise to give me new heart and help.

And it is in this new heart that I now live. A heart that gives all Glory to God for what He has done. A heart that knows that it is Him that is leading me out to green pastures. A heart that sings praises and worships Jesus Christ, the King of Glory. And it is in this new heart that I draw close to Him and talk to Him like a father speaks to his son. And it is in this Spirit that He teaches me His ways, His love, and Holiness.

I know that all my sin is forever washed away. Do I still sin? Yes! Do I repent? Yes! Can I ever out sin God’s grace? No! So if I can’t out sin His grace, then why continue to live a life unpleasing to him? What reward is there in any of that? Because everything else inside me, that is my new heart, is responding to God’s callings. So when He says “Work out your own salvation” it isn’t for working righteous deeds so that I can hopefully get to heaven someday, instead He’s encouraging through this new calling ,“to run with it”, “chase it “ and to “pursue it”.

 

[Rocket_Man]

Oh yes. People walk away from the love of God every day.

Yes we sin guan, because of our nature. But do people who have the seed walk away from it forever?

 

[guanophore]

I hate it when I have to run to a dictionary to know what a word means.

You do?! You do not enjoy study, to show thyself approved? Did you just not post above that God works all things for our good?

 I think the difference is Catholic's using the second candle (God working in us) to back light the first candle (God's work done for us) as if the first candle's flame isn't perfect enough to keep the candle glowing."-

I can understand why it would seem that way to you. It may be that you have never experienced the flow of Gods grace through good works.

I really hope that you do apply the "working out" as "pursuing". But I tend to see the verse copied and pasted here on CAF by Catholics to crush the "always saved" position.

I think it is because the Aposltes taught that it is possible to fall from grace.

 

[Rocket_Man]

What the Apostle is saying is that we are no longer slaves to the flesh. Once Jesus has set us free from sin, we are able to choose to live by the Spirit. If it were not possible for Christians to “live after the flesh” then he would not be instructing them on how to avoid it.

So before we didn’t have any power to overcome the flesh, but now we can only if we live in the Spirit.

 

[guanophore]

Yes we sin guan, because of our nature.

You said it is incompatible with the nature of Christ.

But do people who have the seed walk away from it forever?

Let us take note that, in the parable of the soils, 75% of the sees sprouted and grew. Only a third of those persisted till the end,

 

[Rocket_Man]

If there is no target upon which they can land, why would that worry you? Maybe there is a possibility that there is something lacking in your theology?

Each one of the many spears has to be brought back into context and explained and this will take a considerable amount of time. This posters only desire is to remain on top because this is his game. He’s not here to learn but to destroy, so spending all the time to explain each one will fall on deaf ears. If he is sincere in his post and with the heart to teach, then let him set aside Saul’s spear and instead reach for Jonathan’s arrow and teach us.

 

[Rocket_Man]

Rocket, where did Chesterton say that he denied original sin or believed that one could get to heaven by his works?

He, in fact, said:

Right here! Notice all the “Our”

"whom he did foreknow—>he also did predestinate---->whom he did predestinate---->he also called—>he also justified----he also glorified

What did God foreknow about those whom he did foreknow?

Our faith? Our works? Our love for him? Our prayer’s requesting divine assistance? Our obedience? ALL OF THE ABOVE? "

“Those who, like the Pelagians, seek the reason for predestination only in man’s naturally good works, evidently misjudge the nature of the Christian heaven which is an absolutely supernatural destiny. As Pelagianism puts the whole economy of salvation on a purely natural basis, so it regards predestination in particular not as a special grace, much less as the supreme grace, but only as a reward for natural merit.”

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Right here! Notice all the “Our”

"whom he did foreknow—>he also did predestinate---->whom he did predestinate---->he also called—>he also justified----he also glorified

What did God foreknow about those whom he did foreknow?

Our faith? Our works? Our love for him? Our prayer’s requesting divine assistance? Our obedience? ALL OF THE ABOVE? "

He’s asking what God foreknew and throwing out examples. Perhaps you could explain to me why this use of “our” equates to a denial to original sin and works-only based salvation as you’re claiming…and answer Chestertonrules question.

One quick question: Did your pastors teach you that Catholics believe in a works only based salvation?

 

[Rocket_Man]

He’s asking what God foreknew and throwing out examples. Perhaps you could explain to me why this use of “our” equates to a denial to original sin and works-only based salvation as you’re claiming.

One quick question: Did your pastors teach you that Catholics believe in a works only based salvation?

Maybe I don’t understand it, but just the fact there is a purgatory make’s it very suspicious.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Maybe I don’t understand it, but just the fact there is a purgatory make’s it very suspicious.

You’re welcome to start a thread about it or use the search feature or look it up in the faith or encyclopedia tabs of this site.

By referencing the New Advent article about Pelagian thought and then declaring Chesterton is a heretic (meaning he’s strayed from His own Church’s teaching, meaning works-only based and denial of original sins are condemned by the Church), then you’ve implicitly acknowledged that the Church doesn’t teach a works-only based salvation. You cannot condemn Chesteron for not following the Church and then say that the Church that he follows teaches works-only salvation. You can’t have it both ways.

Not to mention that this is not what Chesterton claimed. He said (I’m paraphasing) that it all comes from God but you’ve gotta cooperate with God to endure to the end.

Care to address the other points Chesterton brought up?

 

[Rocket_Man]

Let us take note that, in the parable of the soils, 75% of the sees sprouted and grew. Only a third of those persisted till the end,

"This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. Those on the rock are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life’s worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop.

Which one of these above retained the seed in their heart?

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

 

[Rocket_Man]

You’re welcome to start a thread about it or use the search feature or look it up in the faith or encyclopedia tabs of this site.

By referencing the New Advent article about Pelagian thought and then declaring Chesterton is a heretic (meaning he’s strayed from His own Church’s teaching, meaning works-only based and denial of original sins are condemned by the Church), then you’ve implicitly acknowledged that the Church doesn’t teach a works-only based salvation. You cannot condemn Chesteron for not following the Church and then say that the Church that he follows teaches works-only salvation. You can’t have it both ways.

Not to mention that this is not what Chesterton claimed. He said (I’m paraphasing) that it all comes from God but you’ve gotta cooperate with God to endure to the end.

Care to address the other points Chesterton brought up?

If you go back and look, I used the words: “may think your a heretic”. The verse in study was one on predestination. What Pelagian’s thought regarding original sin and works-only salvation was not in the lens.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

If you go back and look, I used the words: “may think your a heretic”. The verse in study was one on predestination. What Pelagian’s thought regarding original sin and works-only salvation was not in the lens.

This is your post:

You would be a considered a heretic by your own Church

Those who, like the Pelagians, seek the reason for predestination only in man’s naturally good works, evidently misjudge the nature of the Christian heaven which is an absolutely supernatural destiny. As Pelagianism puts the whole economy of salvation on a purely natural basis, so it regards predestination in particular not as a special grace, much less as the supreme grace, but only as a reward for natural merit.

newadvent.org/cathen/12378a.htm

When I asked you where, you posted his post about and then quotes about Pelagian:

Right here! Notice all the “Our”

"whom he did foreknow—>he also did predestinate---->whom he did predestinate---->he also called—>he also justified----he also glorified

What did God foreknow about those whom he did foreknow?

Our faith? Our works? Our love for him? Our prayer’s requesting divine assistance? Our obedience? ALL OF THE ABOVE? "

“Those who, like the Pelagians, seek the reason for predestination only in man’s naturally good works, evidently misjudge the nature of the Christian heaven which is an absolutely supernatural destiny. As Pelagianism puts the whole economy of salvation on a purely natural basis, so it regards predestination in particular not as a special grace, much less as the supreme grace, but only as a reward for natural merit.”

The only person that brought up Pelagian is you against Chesterton, suggesting that he “may be a considered a heretic against his own church”. Yes, the discussion was based about predestination and you brought up a Catholic encyclopedia about predestination. Did you read the section about Catholic dogma?

The fact is that the Church doesn’t teach a works-only based salvation and has condemned Pelagianism as heresy.

 

[Rocket_Man]

You might be considered a heretic by your own Church
“Those who, like the Pelagians, seek the reason for predestination only in man’s naturally good works, evidently misjudge the nature of the Christian heaven which is an absolutely supernatural destiny. As Pelagianism puts the whole economy of salvation on a purely natural basis, so it regards predestination in particular not as a special grace, much less as the supreme grace, but only as a reward for natural merit.”

See OP #1665

 

[Dancelittleewok]

See OP #1665

Yes, I read the advent article in full.

You’d notice that I referenced that post in my previous post. This has been a great run-around, stalling tactic on your part, Rocket. You still haven’t addressed Chesteronrules post and brought Pelagius in the process or explained why this heretic is relevant to what he actually said or what the CC actually teaches.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Each one of the many spears has to be brought back into context and explained and this will take a considerable amount of time. This posters only desire is to remain on top because this is his game. He’s not here to learn but to destroy, so spending all the time to explain each one will fall on deaf ears. If he is sincere in his post and with the heart to teach, then let him set aside Saul’s spear and instead reach for Jonathan’s arrow and teach us.

If you believe I’ve posted something out of context(or more to the point, posted something deceptive), please point it out.

My desire is to force you to confront the Truth in scripture and Catholic teaching.

Your inabililty to answer simple questions has been noted.

 

[Rocket_Man]

You’d notice that I referenced that post in my previous post. This has been a great run-around, stalling tactic on your part, Rocket. You still haven’t addressed post and brought Pelagius in the process or explained why this heretic is relevant to what he actually said or what the CC actually teaches.

Chesteronrules pulled 10 or something verses out of scripture and slapped them on the page and said, “See! See! Hear you go.” Each one of these have to be put back into context of the author’s intent. This take a considerable amount of time and after doing so, usually the challenger doesn’t even take the time to read your work, but is already arming themselves to throw the next spear.

I am a married man, with six children, and own my own small business. I will get to these or maybe someone else, but it willl take time. But I still feel that after all the effort, it will be a waste of time.