Will the Pope's Pronouncement Set Ecumenism Back a Hundred Years? (Challenge to Apostolicity)

Progressive Theology ^ | July 07

[Frumanchu]

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.

What is it we are saved from if not the punishment due for our sin?

[kosta50]

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

We don't have to pray for His will. "Thy will be done" is an affirmative statement, not hope or possibility, but a fact. It is our recognition of His sovereignty and our submission to Him (as Christians).

After the statement of submission, we petition God to give us our daily bread, to sustain us, to forgive us our sins and to lead us away from the evil one. Those are supplications, FK, and they are meaningful only if we believe that God guides us. If He pre-cast us into a given mold and given destiny, any prayer is a menaingless and empty, indeed pagan ritual. Given the Reformed theology of double predestination, any prayer is a mindless repetition, an empty ritual.

Isa 38:5 leaves no doubt that God intercedes in our lives and that everything is not pre-cast and stangnant.

Kosta: Prayer is not just praise, but supplication. You are asking for a favor.

FK: I agree. God tells us to bring our requests to Him.

How can you agree, FK, if you believe that everything is predetermined?!? What is the point of asking if nothing we ask will change what was cast before the foundations of the world? This is like praying in a movie theater for a specific end of a movie. It's superstition! Reformed theology says that everything is set and nothing can be changedfrom the way God designed it. If  God is driving and we are just cattle in the back, you can pray all you want, the driver will take you where the driver wills. You can just sit back and moo.

(The whole idea that God would trat His children like cattle is the epitomy of Reformed self-debasing heresy).

 However, remember that our own prayers as they are made are also a part of God's plan

That's because God wants us to come to Him. He doesn't force us to pray. The reformed idea that God forces some to be saved and forced others to be lost is contrary to a loving God. Love does not force. Rape is not love (sadly, some people may not understand that).  

Why would God make His "elect" pray? For kicks and giggles? Because He can?  

[P-Marlowe]

There is a clear theme here. The Theology of the Reformation is a God-centered theology where it is God who not only provides the means for our salvation (through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross) but it is God who assures us that our salvation is something that we, in our human frailty, cannot go astray where Christ will not carry us back (by making us new creations in Christ). The Reformed position is that God's sheep (those new creations in Christ) are His and he will not lose any of them. The Reformed can have the assurance of Salvation through the promise of God that none can be snatched from His hand.

The Catholic and Orthodox theology is clearly a self-centered theology wherein God provides nothing more than the opporunity for salvation, but that man is entirely responsible for ensuring and perfecting his own salvation. Objectively it would appear that the Catholic does not believe a man is saved by Christ, but by his own efforts.

Carry on.

[OLD REGGIE]

LOL, Reggie, if there was a true definition of that man made tradition we wouldn't have so many Protestant denominations now would we.

Are you suggesting you have been wasting your time flailing at windmills. If you have no idea what Sola Scriptura is how can you debunk it?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I'm delighted you're reading the Bible. I hope you're not just cutting and pasting, but actually reading the verses you posted. They are life.

The Scriptures are clear that Jesus came to give His life for the world, anyone, the ungodly, sinners, and He invites all to come to Him. There is more joy over one repentent sinner in Heaven...

The outward call is to all men, and no one is prevented from believing. But the only men who do believe are those who have been born again by the Holy Spirit, according to God's will and not our own.

If Jesus paid the price for all men's sins, there would not be one sin on this earth unaccounted for and no one would be condemned to hell.

But Scripture tells us (and our own eyes confirm) that some men do suffer for their sins which obviously haven't been forgiven and thus, Christ did not die for those men or their sins would be erased and God would "remember them no more."

In this matter, I'll believe Christ...

"I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them...

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word" -- John 17:9-10;20

[OLD REGGIE]

Please inform me of you understanding of the dogma of Sola Scriptura.

I don't know of such a thing as a "dogma" of Sola Scriptura.

If you can find one I'd be glad to comment on it.

I'd also be more than willing to comment on your understanding of Sola Scriptura, dogma or not.

I'm perfectly willing to accept Augustine's comment regarding supremacy of Scripture. (Please note it is not "dogma".)

"Whatever you hear from them [the Scriptures], let that be well received by you. Whatever is without them refuse, lest you wander in a cloud." (De Pastore, 11)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Linking to Biblegateway seems sufficient for a website.

No doubt the OPC realizes every member of its church has several Bibles of their own at home.

Sadly, I cannot say that for most of the RCs I know.

[Kolokotronis]

“The Catholic and Orthodox theology is clearly a self-centered theology wherein God provides nothing more than the opporunity for salvation, but that man is entirely responsible for ensuring and perfecting his own salvation. Objectively it would appear that the Catholic does not believe a man is saved by Christ, but by his own efforts.”

Can’t speak to the Roman theology of salvation with any confidence, PM, but I can tell you that Orthodoxy’s theology of theosis really isn’t at all about being saved from or to or into anything. It is in part about being restored to.

“Carry on.”

As we have for 2000 years now! :)

[Kolokotronis]

“What is it we are saved from if not the punishment due for our sin?”

We aren’t saved “from” anything, F. By grace and our response to that grace which is freely available to all, the good and the evil, we can become like God, which is our original created purpose, lost in the Fall and restored by the Incarnation.

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your reply.

Is the “”Whatever you hear from them..” limited to direct quotes of scripture only? Or would preaching/teaching concerning scripture also be included in your view of sola scriptura?

By the way: Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

I believe you would agree sola scriptura qualifies as a principle and as incontrovertibly true. Is it on your own authority that removes it as dogma or that you do not recognize Luther or other Protestant denomination’s confessions as authorities?

[P-Marlowe]

I can tell you that Orthodoxy’s theology of theosis really isn’t at all about being saved from or to or into anything.

Why did Christ die on the cross?

[OLD REGGIE]

By the way: Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

That's my point. I know of no "dogma" of Sola Scriptura. Do you?

I believe you would agree sola scriptura qualifies as a principle and as incontrovertibly true.

Absolutely not. How is it possible for me to agree or disagree with an unstated principle? Put one in writing and I'll comment on it.

Is it on your own authority that removes it as dogma or that you do not recognize Luther or other Protestant denomination’s confessions as authorities?

Do you have a Masters in Non Sequiturism?

One more time, this time I am yelling:

THERE IS NO DOGMA OF SOLA SCRIPTURA!

If you are unwilling or unable to put in writing your understanding of Sola Scriptura I must assume you are playing games. Game time is over.

[D-fendr]

Are you saying that the Protestant dogma of Sola Scriptura doesn't exist? How about the other four Solas?

The term Sola Scripture to describe the dogma has been in use since the 1500s. It's foundational to Protestant theology. You could start with Luther and end with pretty much every current Protestant denomination to find their views on sola scriptura.

Here's one exosition:

Sola Scriptura from A.A. Hodge's "Outlines of Theology".

I doubt many Protestants would agree with you that it doesn't exist.

[Kolokotronis]

“Why did Christ die on the cross?”

Read this:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/chrysostom-easter.html

Or in a nutshell, read my tagline.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I have already given you numerous Scriptures detailing that God desires all men to be saved. You cannot deny this. You have not been able to refute that. Yet, you continue to ignore it and hold to your one-sided theology that ignores God's OWN WILL!

If God wanted all men to be saved, all men would be saved. But they're not. Why is that?

Because some men have been given grace through faith in Jesus Christ and some men have not been given such grace.

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." -- Matthew 20:28

The teaching of Scripture is that the world was condemned until Christ came. Christ on the cross reconciled the sinful world to God. God loves the whole creation and sustains it every second of the day. Why did He not destroy the world after Adam's rebellion? He allowed it to continue and preserved it for the sake of the the unborn elect and for His Son, Jesus Christ.

But God does not love every man within creation. He didn't love Esau. Jesus didn't love Judas, who said it would have been better for Judas had he never been born.

God loves the creation because it is the work of His hands. Within that work are some men who will be born again by the Holy Spirit and receive God's unmerited grace which will display God's mercy throughout the heavens. And also within that work are some men who will not receive saving grace and thus will burn in hell, and this everlasting punishment for sin displays God's perfect judgment.

Christ's salvation is comprehensive. It affects everything in the world because it was designed to heal everything progressively until the final day of judgment. When Christ or Paul speaks of "the world" they are saying that Christ has saved the world from God's wrath, from destruction. But they are not referring to saving grace which God bestows on whom He willed from before the foundation of the world, and NOT for anything "good or evil which they might do" but for His good pleasure alone.

Thus all men benefit generally from Christ's death because the world itself is a better place because of Christ's life and death and resurrection.

"He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit." -- Isaiah 27:6

But only God's elect benefit eternally by it.

"Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" -- 2 Timothy 1:9

The world is being reconciled to God through the preaching of God's word and the work of the Holy Spirit. Christ's death was not in vain.

If Christ died to save all men, yet many still perish in their disbelief, then His death was partially in vain.

And that is impossible.

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." -- Acts 20:28

Christ has purchased the church of God, made up of the elect from all nations and races on earth. And all that has been purchased will be redeemed, according to the will and purpose and good pleasure of God, who "declared the end from the beginning."

[Dr. Eckleburg]

"Whatever you hear from them [the Scriptures], let that be well received by you. Whatever is without them refuse, lest you wander in a cloud." (De Pastore, 11)

Amen. What a lovely statement by Augustine.

"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." -- Proverbs 3:5-6

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Thanks for posting Hodge's great comparison between what Rome and the Reformers think of Scripture.

But the only time the word "dogma" is used by Hodge is when it pertains to the RCC, i.e. "Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican council."

[D-fendr]

Protestants don’t have dogmas I guess? Or do you use a different word for the same thing?

Dogma: a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

[D-fendr]

Seems perhaps if Catholics use a term, Protestants try not to.

I’m surprised the five Solas are in latin.

:)

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your insightful post, P-Marlowe!

I have used the terms “physical” and “spiritual” to explain my musings on the difference in aspect – but I rather like your terms “self centered” versus “God centered.”

The operative point is indeed “self.” One side’s understanding is cast from the physical aspect of an observer. The other side’s understanding removes self from the observation.

Both sides may have the best intentions – seeking to love God absolutely and as a distant second, seeking to love all neighbors unconditionally. (Matt 22)

Nevertheless the two aspects are opposite at the root because they see different things due to this "centering."

The sufficiency of the blood of Christ is the most important example, as you have suggested here. The self centered side would say the blood of Christ is not enough, that man has a part. The God centered side would say the blood of Christ is altogether sufficient, man is immaterial.

Here are some other examples of the differences which result from "centering" - IMHO, of course:

The visible church versus the invisible church

Succession from the apostles by physically laying on hands followed by the indwelling Spirit versus succession by the Spirit’s indwelling regardless of which hands if any were laid.

The good a man does in this life versus the good that God does through a man in this life.

Those who submitted to God’s will (Mary, Peter, Saints, etc.) versus that God accomplished His will using men of His choosing.

That accoutrements help in worship (attire, location, visual and physical aids such as rosaries, art, etc.) versus that accoutrements misdirect worship away from God and to the accoutrements themselves.

The gathering of the Scripture (councils, etc.) versus the Scriptures themselves.

Peter is the rock versus God is the Rock

Trust religious authorities versus trust God

Transubstantiation versus Who is being remembered

Sacraments versus grace

and so on…

That said, I do not see the difference as a Spiritual “poison pill” because, when I look at the apostles themselves some were self oriented and some were God oriented – they covered the gambit, so to speak.

Again my disclaimer – I personally eschew all the doctrines and traditions of men across the board, so I’m not speaking here for or against any of them.

Nevertheless, the leading I have in the Spirit is emphatically God-centered and thus my mantra (to which both sides would surely agree:)

To God be the glory!!!