Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
Simple question: Where/when did Augustine reject the authority of Scripture?
St Augustine never rejected the authority of Scripture, no good Catholic does.
Please note I will not accept a trumped up definition of Sola Scriptura.
Better yet please put your definition of Sola Scriptura in print. HERE___________________________________.
LOL, Reggie, if there was a true definition of that man made tradition we wouldn't have so many Protestant denominations now would we.
Thanks for your reply.
Please inform me of you understanding of the dogma of Sola Scriptura.
Most would believe they have personal assurance of their salvation, which would logically then mean they are of the elect. While they may be reasonably encouraged to believe so, they cannot have assurance of anyone's salvation but their own.
The original statement I responded to implied the latter, and that's what I took issue with :)
Amen.
If God is all in all, then any sacrifice by God is already an ultimate price that cannot be surpassed by anything
Amen.
It is not possible for Christ’s blood to be wasted. It is sufficient for ALL, YET it applies only to the elect, those who come to Him
Amen!
They can only argue what it was INTENDED to cover; never its actual value. It is the one thing in all creation that truly was priceless
Amen. Amen. Amen!
Brilliant, x.
FK: OK, good. I'm glad we agree.
Mark, you are free to believe whatever you like, but I would argue that true message of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is that promiscuous and ungodly life leads to destruction. We all know that this is true and that such life doe snot lead to repentance.
The story of Jonah is a similar one (about repentance and resisting the will of God). The story of Job, likewise, teaches us the truth that we must never blame God for our misfortunes.
The story of David is, likewise, one of salvation through repentance. David is said to have committed cardinal sins (stealing a wife of one of his generals and then arranging to have him killed); he broke the Ten Commandments big time!
Yet, not only was he forgiven, but he was sainted for all practical purposes, so much so that it was acceptable for the Messiah, of all men, to be his direct descendent!
The Gospels teach us that God gives us until the last breath to repent. They also teach us that God is Life and death is the result of sin not God. We bring death upon ourselves, Mark. Without the Gospels, it would be easy to read the OT literally.
We also know that the Jews (except the Orthodox perhaps) interpret the Bible allegorically. Jewish folklore was full of mythology tied to the religion. Mythology was a common method of preaching, so to say, in the ancient world, and Judaism was no exception.
The Bible is, of course, true—in its message. The message is that of a merciful God who asks us to come to Him in repentance with a desire never to sin again. In reading the Bible, remember who is life and who is death. And remember that it's never too late. Never fail to see the symbolism and the true message of biblical stories: they are stories of mercy, love, forgiveness, piety and prayer. Do not fall for Reformed literalism that has become the hallmark of the distortion of Western Christianity.
Do all Calvinists believe they are of the elect?
Martin Luther dealt with that issue in a letter or sermon I read about a year ago. I think his answer was the advice to simply live your life for Christ and trust in His grace, but I’m willing to stand corrected if someone remembers it better than I do.
Was Martin Luther a Calvinist? Not in the sense of being a follower of the man from Geneva, but in the sense that they had very similar thoughts on the issue of predestination and the elect.
Am I a Calvinist? I do believe in the predestination of a pre-established elect, however, I think the bible bases it in God’s entire being and not just one aspect of it.
I don't have enough clout yet.
“I don’t have enough clout yet.”
Want me to write a recommendation?
I would agree that Latins are not Pelagians. So, I'm saying that perhaps in a "third sense" (for you), that the credit is shared 50-50.
Consider the parable of the sower and the seed in Matthew and Luke's Gospel. On one plane, without the seed, God's grace, NO FRUIT WILL GROW. You can water and hoe and kiss the dirt or whatever, and no fruit will grow without that seed. On the other hand, our response ALSO FULLY determines if that seed will grow. Is the dirt prepared? Is it thorny? Is it shallow? Or is it prepared and ready for the graces? In this sense, man is responsible, since man has free will and can focus on worldly goods, or give in to satan, OR open his heart to God and ALLOW GOD to bring the seed to fruition.
Well, I think you are focusing in on the right issue. Who prepares the soil? If man does, then your interpretation would be correct. I contend, however, that it is God who prepares it. Notice that verse 23 (Matt. 13) specifically uses the word "good" when referring to the soil. Who is it that makes things "good"?
Note, in Matthew's version, Jesus gives a short saying from Isaiah on WHY He teaches in parables. Clearly, GOD IS NOT "BLINDING" men, but man is responsible for turning away, as the following shows. This is just a growing number of examples that shows your view as incompatible with Christ's teachings.
For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Mat 13:15
But the next verse shoots down your theory:
Matt 13:16 : But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
It doesn't say "Congratulations for you have decided to see!". No, it says "blessed are your eyes because they see". This is obviously only the work of God. Verse 11 backs this up:
Matt 13:11 : He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.
God gives eyes to see, men don't just decide to have them. It is God's decision, and God's alone, who sees and who is blinded.
Wrong. When did I ever say that I must do "enough works" to enter heaven?
All the time. Stop me when I say something wrong. You believe that entering Heaven is partially based upon your doing works. You believe that if someone accepted Christ at 20, then did one good work, and then turned his back on the Church, doing no more works of love, for the rest of his life, then in the greatest likelihood he would be lost. Therefore, there must be a line that you believe in EVEN IF you can't define it. (I don't even have a problem with that aspect.) That's what I'm saying and that's why I carefully said quality or quantity. For you, God MUST have some minimum standard on which to judge everyone in the area of works for salvation, without being partial.
FK: "Therefore, God CANNOT do "everything" for man's salvation, as you claim."
God provides the seed. Will fruit grow without the seed?
No, but neither will the seed grow in unprepared soil. Any farmer can tell you that. If it is man who prepares the soil, the God does NOT do everything.
Metaphysically, grace and man's nature operates at different levels, they are not analogous, nor are they similar. Without grace, man's nature can do nothing good. This grace enables man's nature, a recreated nature, as Paul writes, with the ability to freely obey.
So far so good. :)
[continuing:] However, ...
Uh-oh.
[continuing:] as Paul and John state, men CONTINUE to sin, thus, man STILL has the ability to follow the flesh which leads to death, or follow the Spirit, which leads to eternal life. It becomes clear that we can only serve one master. While receiving the Spirit enables us to obey God, it doesn't follow that we CANNOT GRIEVE the Spirit. And what does "grieving the Spirit" mean in Scriptures, FK?
It sure doesn't mean losing one's salvation. For example:
Eph 4:30 : And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
I think Latins believe that man is powerful enough to break a Holy Seal. But as AG recently illustrated in a wonderful post, the Bible says otherwise:
Rev 5:2-5 : 2 And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming in a loud voice, "Who is worthy to break the seals and open the scroll?" 3 But no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth could open the scroll or even look inside it. 4 I wept and wept because no one was found who was worthy to open the scroll or look inside. 5 Then one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep! See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals."
I take Holy Seals to be very serious. Man does not have the power to break them. Therefore, grieving the Holy Spirit can and will lead to temporal punishments, but it doesn't threaten salvation.
I see now that you used my same verse from Ephesians in support of your argument. I trust now that you see why that doesn't work.
But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them. Is 63:10.
Sure, but there is no condemnation to hell in the whole rest of the chapter. There is only a beckoning to come back. When we grieve the Holy Spirit we sure can expect there to be hard times ahead. Those are used to bring us back.
[Excerpt from Ez 18:23-27:] Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live?
The comparison made through this whole section is between the obvious lost and the hypocritical who claim to be righteous but are also lost. They act the same in their wickedness. Verse 30 helps here:
Ezek 18:30 : "Therefore, O house of Israel, I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall.
Obviously, the whole House of Israel contained those who were clearly lost, and also pretenders who claimed righteousness, but were in fact hypocrites. God is talking equally to both groups.
Tell me, how is it possible that God is "pleased" with sending men to hell WITHOUT seeing his demerits, but HERE, God wants wicked men to return to Him? Sounds a bit odd, FK? Sounds like more double-talk.
It's one of the many outward calls that God makes periodically throughout scripture. We've covered this before. Taken literally, this passage has God begging. Is God a beggar? :)
We have two Calvin birds hit with one stone. The righteous CAN fall, grieving the Holy Spirit, and can die - while God certainly does not CREATE wicked people. This verse clearly tells us that He AWAITS the wicked to TURN BACK TO HIM.
Nope. The righteous can fall and can grieve the Holy Spirit. They might even physically die because of it. But this does not threaten their salvation. God's Seal is unbreakable by man. ...... On the second point, all men are born wicked. I'm surprised you would argue with that. In any case, it is true that the saved do commit wicked acts, and God will turn them back to Him, or bring them home.
Pray what? What are you praying for? For God to change His mind? For God to un-ordain that which He ordained before the foundations of the world, according to your theology?
I'm not praying for God to change His mind because that is impossible. I'm praying for God's will just as in the Lord's Prayer. God ordained that praying for His will to be done is good prayer, so I do it. :)
Prayer is not just praise, but supplication. You are asking for a favor.
I agree. God tells us to bring our requests to Him.
When you pray for others (not knowing who is elect and who isn't) you are asking God for something on their behalf. That something is something God determined is due to them before your ever lived and will not change no matter how much you pray.
[There were a couple of typos here, so I did my best. Please correct as needed. :)] Your statement is correct. We are taught that this is still good because Jesus prayed for the cup to be taken away. He then qualified by asking for the Father's will to decide. We imitate that. Jesus didn't get what He asked for, so when that happens to us it is no reflection on whether the prayer should have been made in the first place.
However, if God has already predestined everything then your prayer will change nothing. Those who are destined to hell will go to hell and those destined to heaven will go to heaven with or without your prayer.
That is true in a sense, since God is sovereign and doesn't change His mind. However, remember that our own prayers as they are made are also a part of God's plan. God wishes us to pray and in fact commands that we do. Therefore, there is never a "wasted effort" any more than Jesus' prayer was "wasted" when He asked about the cup.
FK, we’re buds so I can say this. :)
Your posts sound like you’re reading recipes from a foreign cookbook.
So not one single Calvinist has ever fallen away from their faith? That is difficult to believe.
Regards
Hmm. Well, I don't see any Scriptures that support election to heaven or eternal glory. All I see is election to membership within the Church, or the People of God. Now, God's promises are given to those in the Church who remain, but everyone "in" the Church are not necessarily going to be saved for heaven (Mat 7:21 rings a bell for me). A lot of Calvinists will quote Scriptures like "being sealed by the Spirit" (Eph 4:30, I believe) or the most quoted Gospel verse from John 11 and the flock. But I don't see even those verses as guaranteeing the individual eternal salvation, only those who persevere. Actually, Paul quite often speaks of perseverance because of the possibility of the individual losing the inheritance, so that would rule out the idea of "guaranteed eternal glory".
Anyway, Jesus' teachings do not strike me as those coming from God who is only looking for a one-time faith declaration. Faith is a way of life, it is completed by works of love and abiding in the Spirit. I don't see "take the narrow road" as a "guaranteed salvation" way.
Regards
Without grace I can do nothing. How can it be "50-50" then? God desires to lift us up, to divinize us. Of course He wants us to respond to Him. But we can only respond to Him by His grace. We can also NOT respond to Him. Again, St. Augustine said we are merely returning God's grace.
Well, I think you are focusing in on the right issue. Who prepares the soil? If man does, then your interpretation would be correct. I contend, however, that it is God who prepares it. Notice that verse 23 (Matt. 13) specifically uses the word "good" when referring to the soil. Who is it that makes things "good"?
Well, in one sense, God prepares the soil, because God created us. But if God makes us as rock without any possible ability to accept seed, then He is lying by saying that He desires all men to be saved. I would say that our response determines what sort of soil that we end up being. Jesus Himself interprets the parable, doesn't He? After His interpretation, He discusses why He tells parables - and He quotes Isaiah and tells us that WE, MEN, turn away, close our eyes. Naturally, some men do NOT close their eyes, but listen to the word. The way I look at it is God gives two men grace. Enough for either to be ready for the word. However, one man grieves the Spirit and turns away, turing to the world. He refuses the Word and its effect. Thus, in that way, man is "making the soil". If we used the graces God gave us to be open to His Word (all entirely from Him - we remain neutral), then we would all be "good soil".
Matt 13:16 : But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
It doesn't say "Congratulations for you have decided to see!". No, it says "blessed are your eyes because they see". This is obviously only the work of God. Verse 11 backs this up:
That can mean "Isn't it wonderful, aren't you blessed to have kept your eyes open?" It doesn't mean that God picked a few people to keep their eyes open and the rest, He closed them purposely. God desires all men to be saved, remember? You are going to have to accept that God, to NOT be a liar, gives enough grace for men to be saved, but some choose NOT to be saved... As to the knowledge, that is a result of their eyes be open. Those who willingly close their eyes will obviously not receive the knowledge!
God gives eyes to see, men don't just decide to have them. It is God's decision, and God's alone, who sees and who is blinded.
That's certainly your opinion. You have not convinced me that God willingly closes the individual's eyes so as to keep them in the dark. That goes against the many Scriptures that God's salvation is offered to all men, that Christ died for all men and that God desires all men to be saved. Again, your theology contradicts Scritpures.
Stop me when I say something wrong. You believe that entering Heaven is partially based upon your doing works.
Stop. You are forgetting I don't do "my works alone", but rather, it is "my works done in Christ". Christ has transformed me, I am in Christ and He is in me. It is not I who live, but Christ within me. Thus, when jo kus does something, it is NOT MYSELF ALONE! There has been a change, a new man has been created, and the Spirit now abides in me. Thus, I can NEVER brag about "my works" because they are NOT "my works alone".
By YOUR system, Jesus Christ is judged, since God does everything... There is nothing to judge men OF! Man is worthless, even when moved by the Spirit. Despite all that stuff the Bible says about being judged for our deeds (for heaven or hell, not "higher position in heaven!")
Eph 4:30 : And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Yes, and the OT tells us that those who grieve the Spirit make themselves potentially the enemy of God. What sort of relationship does an "enemy of God" have? Is that a "saved for heaven" enemy?
I think Latins believe that man is powerful enough to break a Holy Seal. But as AG recently illustrated in a wonderful post, the Bible says otherwise:
Different seals. We do not personally have THAT seal imprinted upon us - since it is the Lord who breaks the seals Himself. Does Jesus break your seal with the Spirit??? See where taking Scriptures out of context does? No, the seal we are given is a mark, saying we belong to God. We are His property. But does that mean that we cannot be discarded? Of course not. Paul says people can lose their inheritance because of their evil works. Again, we cannot earn salvation, but we sure can lose it.
Sure, but there is no condemnation to hell in the whole rest of the chapter. There is only a beckoning to come back. When we grieve the Holy Spirit we sure can expect there to be hard times ahead. Those are used to bring us back
It follows that NOT turning back brings about condemnation. No salvation is given to those who do not repent and turn back. The OT is full of that cycle over and over again. God saves His people ONLY AFTER they turn back to Him. We personally are no different. Also, note that God BECKONS US! He doesn't yank us back against our will. You are merely hurting your theology by quoting the Scriptures.
[Excerpt from Ez 18:23-27:] Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live?
The comparison made through this whole section is between the obvious lost and the hypocritical who claim to be righteous but are also lost. They act the same in their wickedness. Verse 30 helps here:
I disagree, because for BOTH sides of the coin, wicked and righteous, Ezekiel tells us there is a change. Nothing about hypocrisy from the righteous! For all you can tell from this passage, the "righteous" was a perfect Jew who fell away from God. When a person falls away, it doesn't mean that their past 10 years was a farce! You are in denial because your philosophy doesn't allow someone to fall away who was previously "saved". Thus, you close your eyes to the reality of a person falling away...
Ezek 18:30 : "Therefore, O house of Israel, I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall.
HUH? You are trying to explain this away, but it ain't working. It clearly says that those who RETURN, the wicked, will be forgiven, while those who fall under the sway of sin are in trouble - their former works are forgotten. And again, you notice that the Lord is asking MAN to repent. To turn away. You are destroying your own theology with your explanations, since if God was responsible for everything, than why ASK MEN TO RETURN? No, God gives man the grace, then asks him to return. Some accept the grace and take up the offer, others do not.
It's one of the many outward calls that God makes periodically throughout scripture. We've covered this before. Taken literally, this passage has God begging. Is God a beggar? :)
God is a passionate lover. He is humble. I do not have a problem with God "begging" us to return to Him freely. This is in accord with the NT Scriptures, especially when you consider that crucifixion is a humiliation beyond belief.
Nope. The righteous can fall and can grieve the Holy Spirit. They might even physically die because of it. But this does not threaten their salvation.
The Scriptures differ. I have posted enough verses that show that Christians can lose their salvation. There are NO verses that I have found in the NT that discuss election to glory for individuals, only the Church as a whole. It's all wishful thinking, esp. when you come up with that Calvinist who leaves the faith. If you say, "he never was saved to begin with", that jeopardizes EVERY Calvinist, since NO ONE knows their future and whether THEY will fall or not.
On the second point, all men are born wicked. I'm surprised you would argue with that. In any case, it is true that the saved do commit wicked acts, and God will turn them back to Him, or bring them home.
God doesn't create evil. That is your opinion, but I would like to see some Scriptures that supports that God creates evil.
I understand if you want to stop, as we are not getting anywhere and these posts are pretty long, anyways.
Regards
That sounds funny, FK, coming from the Reformed side which reads the bible literally, almost like a fairytale, when it suits its agenda.
I haven't the slightest idea what your point is.
FK: "... a better view is to see these verses more as the Jews saw them at the time. To them, only Jews could go to Heaven. These verses opened up "the world" to include Gentiles."
Really? That's why God created a New Covenant.
Really? Do you believe God created a New Covenant to correct an error?
Jews were the "elect," the chosen to bring the knowledge of God to the whole world (salvation is from the Jews) and not to take it as a privilegde of being the only ones going to heaven. That is precisely where their error was, and where the Reformed error is.
You continue to skip Reformed theology 101. If you ever bothered to audit that class for even ONE DAY, you would know that NO REFORMER says that only Reformers go to Heaven. That is one of many straw men leveled by the accusers.
God's offer is one of love for mankind, not love for some and hate for others as men would have it. Why is His offer of salvation for all of humanity a "collossal failure?" You disallow God the freedom to allow free choice.
You disallow God's omnipotence. If God is not omnipotent, then He can fail, as is requred in your model. That is your decision. The offer is not the failure, the result is, under your theology.
God's offer is one of love for mankind, not love for some and hate for others as men would have it. Why is His offer of salvation for all of humanity a "collossal failure?" You disallow God the freedom to allow free choice.
It's simple. You claim God's will that all men be saved. If you equated "God's will" to "God's offer", then this argument would mostly go away. :) But I do not think that is reasonable. If that happened then we would be back to who decides salvation, God or man? We obviously disagree on that. :)
I am surprised by those who do not believe that God grants sustaining, saving grace to those who come to Him.
It seems to me that they are saying that they have no assurance of His love for them.
I do not believe in a fickle God who loves you one moment and rejects you the next. I do not see such a God portrayed in the bible, and I certainly don’t see it in the kenosis, the gracious life, the sacrificial death, and the justifying resurrection of our Lord Jesus.
I believe “if God is for you, who can be against you?”
He is not the author of sin, that is true. You equate sovereignty with responsibility. This directly leads to the artificially created duty that you place on God to succumb to the human view of fairness. When you presume to declare what all Reformers believe, you forget what we say over an over again. Man is responsible for his own sin.
You know, Padre, even when I was a little boy in Catholic school I used to wonder why the nuns taught us about a God who loved little children one minute and sent them to hell the next if they “missed Mass” on Sunday. On the other hand, as an adult I must say I am even more confused and repelled by a Calvinist notion of some monster god whose wrath was only assuaged by the bloody death of Christ.
I’ll stick with +Anthony the Great:
“God is good, dispassionate, and immutable. Now someone who thinks it reasonable and true to affirm that God does not change, may well ask how, in that case, it is possible to speak of God as rejoicing over those who are good and showing mercy to those who honor Him, and as turning away from the wicked and being angry with sinners. To this it must be answered that God neither rejoices nor grows angry, for to rejoice and to be offended are passions; nor is He won over by the gifts of those who honor Him, for that would mean He is swayed by pleasure. It is not right that the Divinity feel pleasure or displeasure from human conditions. He is good, and He only bestows blessings and never does harm, remaining always the same. We men, on the other hand, if we remain good through resembling God, are united to Him, but if we become evil through not resembling God, we are separated from Him. By living in holiness we cleave to God; but by becoming wicked we make Him our enemy. It is not that He grows angry with us in an arbitrary way, but it is our own sins that prevent God from shining within us and expose us to demons who torture us. And if through prayer and acts of compassion we gain release from our sins, this does not mean that we have won God over and made Him to change, but that through our actions and our turning to the Divinity, we have cured our wickedness and so once more have enjoyment of God’s goodness. Thus to say that God turns away from the wicked is like saying that the sun hides itself from the blind.”
Whoa...hold on a second. Where did you get that? That again is a non-sequitor. First, I said most not all. Second, the only statement I would make along those lines is that not one single elect person has ever fallen fully and finally away from their faith.
Reformed Christians believe that true believers can have assurance of their salvation:
Such as truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love him in sincerity, endeavoring to walk in all good conscience before him, may in this life be certainly assured that they are in a state of grace, and may rejoice in the hope of the glory of God: which hope shall never make them ashamed. This certainty is not a bare conjectural and probably persuasion, grounded upon a fallible hope; but an infallible assurance of faith, founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the inward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made, the testimony of the Spirit of adoption witnessing with our spirits that we are the children of God; which Spirit is the earnest of our inheritance, whereby we are sealed to the day of redemption. - WCF (XVIII,i-ii)We also believe though that non-believers may "vainly deceive themselves with false hopes and carnal presumptions: of being in the favor of God and estate of salvation" (XVIII,i), and also that assurance is not of the essence of salvation for the elect may have theirs "divers ways shaken, diminished, and intermitted" (XVIII,iv).
To reiterate, we do not believe all Calvinists are saved/elect, and it is as entirely possible to see a professing Calvinist fall away as virtually all other groups.
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.