Posted on 11/19/2013 6:10:28 AM PST by Gamecock
I don’t know what that had to do with post 112.
As whites abandon the Catholic church in droves, they aren’t mostly becoming pagans as the poster had claimed.
Interesting, because that is not at all what I hear when I hear the term "sin nature".
What exactly do you mean by we are "subject to satan's deeds"?
(I don't want to poison your response, but that sounds to me a lot like we're sort of hostages in his thrall or kingdom, who need to be, in a manner of speaking, "ransomed". That I completely agree with, and it has a fine pedigree. But I don't think that's the essence of original sin. If Satan went "poof" and vanished into non-existence tomorrow, original sin would be just as real.)
How do you think Adam's own nature -- his humanity, if you prefer, was affected by his & Eve's sin? A followup: If you think his nature was changed, what implications did that have for his descendants?
It is still true, white Catholics are leaving, but mostly to get more involved in their Christian faith, not become Pagans.
For all Catholics leaving that denomination, close to half become more involved in their Christian faith, and close to half are dropping away from all church involvement.
Interesting that you quote this:
Obviously the story offers no justification for enslaving African Negroes, even though Canaan is presented as a “son” of Ham because the land of Canaan belonged to Hamitic Egypt at the time of the Israelite invasion.
Do you disagree with it? It was a common part of the pro-slavery apologia offered by Christians in the American South before the Civil War.
“Those are the New American Bible notes. They aren’t any kind of de fide teaching.”
It possesses a nihil obstat and imprimatur, and is used and made available on the Vatican website.
“Do you disagree with it? It was a common part of the pro-slavery apologia offered by Christians in the American South before the Civil War.”
A trollish diversionary comment.
“In context, the “deliberate sin” he’s talking about is apostasy (return to Judaism) motivated by cowardice. But the point stands that it’s possible to fall away.”
It is not possible for the Elect to fall away, as is quite clear in scripture, though the reprobate can certainly fall away. As Augustine explains:
“But of such as these [the Elect] none perishes, because of all that the Father has given Him, He will lose none. John 6:39 Whoever, therefore, is of these does not perish at all; nor was any who perishes ever of these. For which reason it is said, They went out from among us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would certainly have continued with us. John 2:19”. (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints)
Hebrews 6 most likely deals with men like Judas, who was filled with the Spirit, and even performed miracles along with the rest of the Apostles (Matt 10:1-8), and yet was always accounted a devil and a thief (John 6:70, 12:6). There are men during the Apostolic age who performed miracles by the power of the Holy Ghost, and yet had no saving grace, and therefore were ultimately unknown to the true church of God.
“Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
(Mat 7:22-23)
Compare to Christ’s words to the SHeep of God, who are always known by God:
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.”
(Joh 10:27-28)
And again, all those who apostasize from the faith, were never of us from the beginning:
1Jn_2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
| 'Merry'. |
| 'Christmas'. |
I kid you not."
- - - - - - -
Have you ever heard of this guy from football-past?
Happy Feller
- - - - - - -
Also, in another post you made, I noticed you said you used to be an Episcopal clergyman. If I may ask, did you ever have occasion to connect with Marcus Grodi's "Coming Home Network"?
Depends on who "the Elect" are. God knows from all time who is ultimately going to heaven and who isn't. It is impossible for the blessed to fall away and be damned, because then they wouldn't be the blessed anymore -- but that observation is tautological.
Those are the "elect" Augustine is talking about.
But Augustine also explains that they are seen (by us) only to have been preserved in hindsight, *after* death:
I assert, therefore, that the perseverance by which we persevere in Christ even to the end is the gift of God; and I call that the end by which is finished that life wherein alone there is peril of falling. Therefore it is uncertain whether any one has received this gift so long as he is still alive. For if he fall before he dies, he is, of course, said not to have persevered; and most truly is it said. How, then, should he be said to have received or to have had perseverance who has not persevered? For if anyone have continence, and fall away from that virtue and become incontinent,—or, in like manner, if he have righteousness, if patience, if even faith, and fall away, he is rightly said to have had these virtues and to have them no longer; for he was continent, or he was righteous, or he was patient, or he was believing, as long as he was so; but when he ceased to be so, he no longer is what he was. On the gift of perseverance, ch 1Augustine seems here to be clearly saying that some people "are rightly said" to have faith and various virtues, but then can fall away. He doesn't seem to endorse the "they were never really saved to begin with" explanation.
Neither of which makes it obligatory for any Catholic to believe. Acceptable and even encouraged, I'll grant, but not obligatory.
A trollish diversionary comment.
[shrug] You cited it as something with which you disagreed. I asked if you really disagreed with it.
I enjoyed your post. The tone reminded me of my favorite uncle. How someone delivers information like you did says a lot about, IMHO, how Christ is working in them.
God Bless
Sir was St. John so deluded when he wrote that statement?
“Augustine seems here to be clearly saying that some people “are rightly said” to have faith and various virtues, but then can fall away. He doesn’t seem to endorse the “they were never really saved to begin with” explanation.”
A silly assertion from someone who is not familiar with Augustine and didn’t bother to read the quote he provided. Augustine’s position is that perseverence is a gift from God only given to the Elect, who are chosen before the foundation of the world without regard for any foreseen works or faith. The elect are chosen so that they produce good works, but are not chosen because of them, as you would falsely imagine:
Commenting on Romans 9
“And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.”
(Rom 9:10-17)
Augustine:
“And, moreover, who will be so foolish and blasphemous as to say that God cannot change the evil wills of men, whichever, whenever, and wheresoever He chooses, and direct them to what is good? But when He does this He does it of mercy; when He does it not, it is of justice that He does it not for “He has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardens.” And when the apostle said this, he was illustrating the grace of God, in connection with which he had just spoken of the twins in the womb of Rebecca, who “being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calls, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.” And in reference to this matter he quotes another prophetic testimony: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” But perceiving how what he had said might affect those who could not penetrate by their understanding the depth of this grace: “What shall we say then?” he says: “Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.” For it seems unjust that, in the absence of any merit or demerit, from good or evil works, God should love the one and hate the other. Now, if the apostle had wished us to understand that there were future good works of the one, and evil works of the other, which of course God foreknew, he would never have said, not of works, but, of future works, and in that way would have solved the difficulty, or rather there would then have been no difficulty to solve. As it is, however, after answering, God forbid; that is, God forbid that there should be unrighteousness with God; he goes on to prove that there is no unrighteousness in God’s doing this, and says: “For He says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” “ (Augustine, The Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Chapter 98. Predestination to Eternal Life is Wholly of God’s Free Grace.)
” God knows from all time who is ultimately going to heaven and who isn’t. It is impossible for the blessed to fall away and be damned, because then they wouldn’t be the blessed anymore “
Compare your doctrine of God only foreknowing their salvation with these words:
“But these brethren of ours, about whom and on whose behalf we are now discoursing, say, perhaps, that the Pelagians are refuted by this testimony in which it is said that we are chosen in Christ and predestinated before the foundation of the world, in order that we should be holy and immaculate in His sight in love. For they think that having received God’s commands we are of ourselves by the choice of our free will made holy and immaculate in His sight in love; and since God foresaw that this would be the case, they say, He therefore chose and predestinated us in Christ before the foundation of the world. Although the apostle says that it was not because He foreknew that we should be such, but in order that we might be such by the same election of His grace, by which He showed us favour in His beloved Son. When, therefore, He predestinated us, He foreknew His own work by which He makes us holy and immaculate. Whence the Pelagian error is rightly refuted by this testimony. But we say, say they, “that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work.” But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, “We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who works all things.” (Ephesians 1:11) He, therefore, works the beginning of our belief who works all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;” (Romans 11:29) and of which it is said: “Not of works, but of Him that calls” (Romans 9:12) (although He might have said, of Him that believes); and the election which the Lord signified when He said: “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” (John 15:16) For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe. But all the many things which we have said concerning this matter need not to be repeated.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Chp. 38)
Pay heed to the scriptures Augustine cites. He explains them quite well.
“Neither of which makes it obligatory for any Catholic to believe. “
IOW, your religion makes Liberal scholarship available on its website as a teaching tool without comment, and you are not required to believe it as a Catholic.
Such is the sad world of Catholicism.
“[shrug] You cited it as something with which you disagreed. I asked if you really disagreed with it.”
I cited the scholarship that accused the Jews of placing racist text into the scripture in order to justify atrocity. It had nothing to do with supporting atrocity, hence why I called your comment trollish.
Since the Eucharist is one and the same sacrifice as Calvary, there would seem to be no problem.
And unbloody sacrifice is useless killing.
??? So when the Israelites offered a grain offering -- an unbloody sacrifice -- was that "useless killing"? When Melchizedek -- a priest of God most high -- offered bread and wine, was that "useless killing"?
I have no problem with that; in fact, I previously agreed with it.
The elect are chosen so that they produce good works, but are not chosen because of them, as you would falsely imagine
Mind reading is not allowed in the religion forum. I "falsely imagine" no such thing.
The question is not any of the red herrings you raised, but this: Can someone be justified and then fail to persevere -- through their own fault, of course? Augustine and I say yes. What do you say?
Is there evidence in the NT where someone who receives the Holy Spirit and then the Holy Spirit departs them?
There is however an example of someone in Acts 8 denied the Holy Spirit after baptism.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
As opposed to the sad world of liberal Protestantism, which persecutes and hounds those who don't accept liberal scholarship?
Take your "sad world" concept up with the faithful Christians left in the PCUSA, the orthodox Anglicans wondering where to go, and the United Methodists watching their denomination drift toward total apostasy.
That's the real "sad world," and it ain't Rome's fault.
I cited the scholarship that accused the Jews of placing racist text into the scripture in order to justify atrocity.
The people who used that text "in order to justify atrocity" were virtually all Christians. Many of them were Protestants.
If you mean an anecdote about a specific, named person, I doubt it.
However, I don't think the texts I posted from Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 are describing a situation which can't actually occur, or didn't actually occur.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.