Originally Posted by Lutero
Scripture says we receive grace through faith.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--
The RCC has seven sacraments. And you say that we receive grace through the Sacraments.
Scripture says we receive grace through faith.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--
The RCC has seven sacraments. And you say that we receive grace through the Sacraments.
Mark 16:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
He gave them the Holy Ghost, the source of all grace.
King James Version (KJV)
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Again, the Holy Ghost is received in the Eucharist, and is described here as the Spirit of grace.
Or Reconciliation is the grace of union with God, through the Holy Spirit:
2 Corinthians 5:18-20King James Version (KJV)
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
Oh well, the word grace is not there, but if you don't understand that being reconciled to God is a grace of the Holy Spirit, I can't help you.
King James Version (KJV)
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
17 Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.
18 And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.
19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
The word grace is not there either. Oh well, again, it is a grace of God, a gift to be healed of ailment in body and soul.
King James Version (KJV)
14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
Grace is that gift.
King James Version (KJV)
22 Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the Lord.
I hope that helps.
Sincerely,
De Maria
Hi De Maria ... This is Jason Fernandes. My reply to your post on Steve Ray's Blog. Unfortunately Mr Steve, for obvious reasons will not approve of my post in regards to "free will". So here below is my response to your post on the topic "Are you Born Again?" at http://www.catholic-convert.com/2013/03/04/are-you-born-again/.
ReplyDelete--------------------
How Are We Free?
Let me say, however, that in one sense we all have free will or free choice. What I mean by that is we all do whatever we want to do. We are free agents in this sense. When it comes to the everyday normal choices we make, we freely make those choices to do what we want to do. Although we are free beings and we freely choose to do what we want to do, we are not free spiritual beings. This is a very important distinction. When it comes to making decisions about God and the things of the Spirit, the unsaved do not have the free will spiritual ability to make those decisions. We are dead spiritually, as mentioned previously, which means we are dead or incapable of making free decisions of any spiritual good toward our Creator or our salvation.
That ability has been totally corrupted by our sin nature. Sin destroyed our freedom of will to do right, and now we serve the lusts of our sinful flesh. At the fall of man, what was it that fell? It was the free will ability to equally choose good or evil with a view to pleasing God. Now we are left with an overwhelming predisposition and desire by our wills to do evil and sin against our Creator.
So here is the truth of Scripture. Since the fall of man, there is no such thing as a free will spiritual ability or power to equally choose good or evil. Man’s inclination is to choose evil. Read again Paul’s comments in Rom. 7:14-25. Man’s will is corrupted and in slavery to sin (John 8:34). The unsaved individual does not understand the things of God and will not seek God with his spiritually dead will. The Scriptures are clear on this point. (Rom. 3:11-12).
Hi Jason,
DeleteThanks for posting.
So, if I understand correctly, you recognize that we have a free will towards "ordinary" everyday things. Could you give an example of such as those?
But you claim we have no free will to choose good or evil towards our Creator. Am I correct? Could you give an example of such as these?
Here's the dilemma. We believe that everything we do is towards our Creator. There is no such thing as something neutral. Everything we do is either in the Name of God, or its evil.
Remember Matt 25:31-46? Notice that the goats did nothing at all. They didn't kick their neighbor. They didn't poison their neighbor. But they did nothing at all to help their neighbor. They were condemned to hell for their inactivity.
Scripture says that we must love God with all our heart, soul, mind and body. Scripture also says that if we do not love neighbor, we can not love God. 1 John 4:20
Now, lets take an unregenerate man or woman. Does he love neighbor? Does he love his wife? Does she love him in turn? Do they love their children?
Scripture says that anyone who loves is a child of God: 1 John 4:7
Consider also that we are all unregenerate until we are born again. But Jesus said of the little children:
Matthew 19:14
But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
Only the righteous and good can enter heaven. Therefore Jesus was saying that the little children are fundamentally good.
Therefore, we believe that, after the Fall, man is fundamentally good, but inclined to sin. We do not believe that men are totally depraved.
Sincerely,
De Maria
So, if I understand correctly, you recognize that we have a free will towards "ordinary" everyday things. Could you give an example of such as those?
ReplyDeleteApplicable to unsaved, unregenerate. Also to the saved because our souls are still housed in a fallen flesh. What are the ordinary natural man is capable of doing in his free will ? Well many .. for e.g. we can see all the technological advancements around us, making a decision to invest or not. And off course according to the scriptures, walking not according to the Spirit of God but according to and controlled by flesh desires. See Mark 7:21-23. Also Genesis 6:5, Job 15:14, Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, Jer 17:9, John 6:44, John 6:64-65, Romans 8:7-8, 1 Cor 2:14, Titus 3:3.
But you claim we have no free will to choose good or evil towards our Creator. Am I correct? Could you give an example of such as these?
People are by nature not inclined or even able to love God wholly with heart, mind, and strength, but rather all are inclined by nature to serve their own will and desires and to reject the rule of God. Even religion and philanthropy are wicked to God to the extent that these originate from a human imagination, passion, and will, and are not done to the glory and will of God.
Total depravity does not mean, however, that people are as evil as possible. Rather, it means that even the good which a person may intend is faulty in its premise, false in its motive, and weak in its implementation; and there is no mere refinement of natural capacities that can correct this condition. Thus, even acts of generosity and altruism are in fact egoist acts in disguise. All good, consequently, is derived from God alone, and in no way through humanity.
This idea can be illustrated by a glass of wine with a few drops of deadly poison in it: Although not all the liquid is poison, all the liquid is poisoned. In the same way, while not all of human nature is depraved, all human nature is totally affected by depravity.
You refer 1 John 4:20 and 1 John 4:7 - Does the Love God also applies to say a person who is an Atheist? I know of persons who are God haters or don't believe in God - but the man is very loving to his neignbours and is truly adored for being very loving and social. Does he become a Child of God in view of 1 John 4:7? Can 1 John 4:20 be applicable to such a person? Is such a person still fundamentally good as you claim? Does not 1 John 4:7 and 1 John 4:20, talk about "Godly Love"? If I don't love God, but instead love my fellow human beings, can that be equated with Godly love described in those verses?
In Matthew 19:14 - Yes Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: but at the same time Proverbs 22:6 kicks in. We can't automagically expect children to follow God if their not trained according to God's will as laid out in scripture. Jesus didn't say children are fundamentally good, rather he used their "child-like innocence" as a picture to describe such is the kingdom of heaven. Importantly, we need to also look at the faith of those parents who brought their children to Christ - believing in him, knowing he is GOD who is ALL ABLE. Children are sinners also and only Christ is the remedy for their sinful nature.
People are by nature not inclined or even able to love God wholly with heart, mind, and strength, but rather all are inclined by nature to serve their own will and desires and to reject the rule of God.
DeleteAgreed. We call that concupiscence, one of the effects of Original Sin.
Even religion and philanthropy are wicked to God to the extent that these originate from a human imagination, passion, and will, and are not done to the glory and will of God.
Agreed. I believe we agree there. Remember, I said, "Everything we do is either in the Name of God, or its evil."
Total depravity does not mean, however, that people are as evil as possible. Rather, it means that even the good which a person may intend is faulty in its premise, false in its motive, and weak in its implementation; and there is no mere refinement of natural capacities that can correct this condition. Thus, even acts of generosity and altruism are in fact egoist acts in disguise. All good, consequently, is derived from God alone, and in no way through humanity.
If that is the case, I don't see a difference between the Catholic Teaching of Original Sin and Total Depravity.
Apparently, Total Depravity is a misnomer. Since it does not mean that people are as wicked as possible. If anyone were to say, "that is depraved", they would mean, "that is totally wicked". The word "total" in "Total Depravity" makes it a redundancy. It insinuates that someone is completely immoral with no possibility of salvation:
de·praved
/diˈprāvd/
Adjective
Morally corrupt.
Synonyms
corrupt - vicious - rotten
But you say that is not the case. OK.
This idea can be illustrated by a glass of wine with a few drops of deadly poison in it: Although not all the liquid is poison, all the liquid is poisoned. In the same way, while not all of human nature is depraved, all human nature is totally affected by depravity.
That is a contradiction to what you just said. If a glass of wine has poison in it, then it is totally deadly. That goes back to being as wicked as possible. A man affected in such a way is beyond saving.
So, you need to make up your mind. Does "Total Depravity" mean, totally wicked or not?
If it means totally wicked, then we do not agree.
If it means that some good remains in the person, then you are describing the Catholic Doctrine of Original Sin. That person has a free will and can do good.
You refer 1 John 4:20 and 1 John 4:7 - Does the Love God also applies to say a person who is an Atheist? I know of persons who are God haters or don't believe in God - but the man is very loving to his neignbours and is truly adored for being very loving and social. Does he become a Child of God in view of 1 John 4:7?
God is Love. Therefore anyone who loves is a Child of God by definition. Love is the Glory of God. Anyone who loves, by that very act, glorifies God.
Can 1 John 4:20 be applicable to such a person?
Yes.
Is such a person still fundamentally good as you claim?
Yes.
Does not 1 John 4:7 and 1 John 4:20, talk about "Godly Love"? If I don't love God, but instead love my fellow human beings, can that be equated with Godly love described in those verses?
Yes.
In Matthew 19:14 - Yes Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: but at the same time Proverbs 22:6 kicks in.
True. I don't see a contradiction. Remember, the Old Testament is talking about unregenerate people. All of them. All the people of the Old Testament were unregenerate. Including Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, all the Prophets, etc.
The saving Grace of Jesus Christ was not released until Jesus Christ died on the Cross and they did not enter heaven until that time. Scripture says:
Heb 11:
39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
cont'd
cont'd
DeleteWe can't automagically expect children to follow God if their not trained according to God's will as laid out in scripture.
Amen! But training does not regenerate them. The Washing of the Holy Spirit regenerates them.
Jesus didn't say children are fundamentally good, rather he used their "child-like innocence" as a picture to describe such is the kingdom of heaven.
In children, innocence is not child like. It is plain and true, innocence. Innocence is described as child like when it is exhibited by an adult.
And innocence is another word for righteous. An innocent person is righteous.
Main Entry: righteous [rahy-chuhs] Show IPA
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: good, honest
Synonyms: angelic, blameless, charitable, commendable, conscientious, creditable, deserving, devoted, devout, dutiful, equitable, ethical, exemplary, fair, faithful, godlike, guiltless, holy, honorable, impartial, innocent, irreproachable, just, laudable, law-abiding, matchless, meritorious, moral, noble, peerless, philanthropic, philanthropical, praiseworthy, punctilious, pure, reverent, right-minded, saintly, scrupulous, sinless, spiritual, sterling, trustworthy, upright, virtuous, worthy
That is why those in heaven are like children. Because they are innocent and therefore righteous in the eyes of God.
Importantly, we need to also look at the faith of those parents who brought their children to Christ - believing in him, knowing he is GOD who is ALL ABLE.
Absolutely! That is why we believe in infant Baptism.
Children are sinners
Children are incapable of sin until they acquire they understand right from wrong.
also and only Christ is the remedy for their sinful nature.
Agreed. To us, a sinful nature simply means a fallen nature. A condition where we are prone to choose to do sin rather than good. And Jesus is the remedy. That is correct.
Sincerely,
De Maria
One day a man said, that he did not believe any man had the power to walk to the house of God unless the Father drew him. This was very foolish saying. Because as long as a man was alive and had legs, it was as easy for him to walk to the house of God as to the house of Satan. There is no lack of physical power in coming to Christ, as physically men are alive, they can raise a hand in coming to Christ, they can walk down the aisle in coming to Christ, and they can say a prayer in coming to Christ. But just because they did all these things physically, it does not mean they truly came to Christ. The defect is not in the body, as the natural man is alive and strong physically, the defect is in the mind and in the heart. It is spiritual. It is the matters of the heart - the inner man. As he is spiritually dead.
ReplyDeleteAnother example of a lion and a sheep. The lion has legs so does sheep, the lion has a mouth so does a sheep, the lion have ears so does a sheep. Physically both can walk and eat. But the lion will not eat grass like a sheep neither the sheep will eat meat like a lion. The distinction is in the nature. By nature, the Lion is different than a sheep. In the same way by the natural mans nature is so corrupt that he has neither the will nor the power to come to Christ unless drawn by the Spirit. Because of the fall, the sinner is dead, (Eph 2:5) blind (2 Cor 4:4), and deaf to the things of God (Isa 29:18); his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. (Jer 17:9) His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.
AnonymousMarch 13, 2013 at 11:51 AM
DeleteOne day a man said, that he did not believe any man had the power to walk to the house of God unless the Father drew him. This was very foolish saying. Because as long as a man was alive and had legs, it was as easy for him to walk to the house of God as to the house of Satan. There is no lack of physical power in coming to Christ, as physically men are alive, they can raise a hand in coming to Christ, they can walk down the aisle in coming to Christ, and they can say a prayer in coming to Christ. But just because they did all these things physically, it does not mean they truly came to Christ. The defect is not in the body, as the natural man is alive and strong physically, the defect is in the mind and in the heart. It is spiritual. It is the matters of the heart - the inner man. As he is spiritually dead.
How do you know? Do you read hearts? How do you know that God didn't call that man? Romans 14:4
Another example of a lion and a sheep. The lion has legs so does sheep, the lion has a mouth so does a sheep, the lion have ears so does a sheep. Physically both can walk and eat. But the lion will not eat grass like a sheep neither the sheep will eat meat like a lion. The distinction is in the nature. By nature, the Lion is different than a sheep. In the same way by the natural mans nature is so corrupt that he has neither the will nor the power to come to Christ unless drawn by the Spirit.
THAT is the Catholic Teaching.
Here is the difference, I think. We believe that people choose to be drawn or not. God is trying to draw everyone. But some, maybe most people, refuse to answer His call.
Because of the fall, the sinner is dead, (Eph 2:5) blind (2 Cor 4:4), and deaf to the things of God (Isa 29:18); his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. (Jer 17:9) His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.
That is different than what we believe.
!. We are not born sinners. We are born with Original Sin in our soul, which is a different matter. That means we are inclined to commit sin.
2. Just as even the most wicked of men, loves his mom and dad and children and wife, this is good and glorifies God. But, when he follows his evil inclinations, as he usually will do, this is evil. Men have the ability to choose good. But are incapable of doing it without the grace of God.
3. God grants His grace even to evil people in order that they might choose to do good and be saved:
Matthew 5:45
That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Sincerely,
De Maria
Now according to Arminiasm, man has the ability or the free will of choosing power to accept Christ. If this is so, then man is cannot be spiritually dead. And God is infinitely holy and man is a sinner, for man to come to the holy God, he must have even a little goodness and righteousness in him, meaning man is not that bad. This is humanism.
ReplyDeleteAnonymousMarch 13, 2013 at 11:56 AM
DeleteNow according to Arminiasm, man has the ability or the free will of choosing power to accept Christ. If this is so, then man is cannot be spiritually dead. And God is infinitely holy and man is a sinner, for man to come to the holy God, he must have even a little goodness and righteousness in him, meaning man is not that bad. This is humanism.
1. Humanism is atheism. Humanists do not believe in God.
2. I think you mean, Pelagianism.
3. Neither of those is Catholic Teaching.
Catholic Teaching says that without the grace of God, no one can choose to do good or to come to God.
Hebrews 11:6
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
Sincerely,
De Maria
Hi Jason,
ReplyDeleteyou said,
AnonymousMarch 13, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Applicable to unsaved, unregenerate.
Yes. What things can an unsaved, unregenerate man do with his free will?
Also to the saved because our souls are still housed in a fallen flesh.
Are you saying that the saved are also free to do these thing?
What are the ordinary natural man is capable of doing in his free will ?
Yes.
Well many .. for e.g. we can see all the technological advancements around us, making a decision to invest or not. And off course according to the scriptures, walking not according to the Spirit of God but according to and controlled by flesh desires.
Wonderful! I think this gets to the meat of the question. They have a free will to walk not according to the Spirit of God but according to and controlled by flesh desires.
Doesn't that mean that they also have a free will to walk according to the Spirit of God but according to and controlled by flesh desires?
Having a free will means having the ability to decide, one way or another. The ability to choose. If they can choose evil, they also have the ability to choose good.
See Mark 7:21-23. Also Genesis 6:5, Job 15:14, Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, Jer 17:9, John 6:44, John 6:64-65, Romans 8:7-8, 1 Cor 2:14, Titus 3:3.
These are a lot to discuss. But I think Titus 3:3 makes my point. The regenerate were once unregenerate. They had to choose to be regenerated. Choose to accept God:
Romans 6:16
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
Sincerely,
De Maria
The Scriptures say man is spiritually dead and powerless. The Arminian view shatters in the light of scripture.
ReplyDelete16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden;
17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when
you eat of it you will surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17).
Notice the statement - "you shall surely die". - This is spiritual death.
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.
(Ephesians 2:1-2)
1Co 15:22 for as in Adam all die
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,
and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned-- (Romans 5:12) Adam and Eves first son Cain was a murderer, this was the result of the first sin.
David said, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful at the time my mother conceived me."(Psalms 51:5)
We are all inherited with Adams sin. You do not have to teach a child to lie or to be disobedient; the child is disobedient by birth. We are sinners not because we sin, but we are sinners because we are sinners.
Jason Fernandes
Hi Jason,
DeleteAnonymousMarch 13, 2013 at 9:43 PM
The Scriptures say man is spiritually dead and powerless.
Lets look at them in detail and compare to other Scriptures.
The Arminian view shatters in the light of scripture.
Its a good thing I'm not Armenian. However, I believe I have shown that the Protestant teaching of Total Depravity shatters in the light of Scripture. Let's proceed.
16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden;
17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when
you eat of it you will surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17).
Notice the statement - "you shall surely die". - This is spiritual death.
Correct. The Original Sin of Adam and Eve was a mortal sin which caused the death of the soul because they obeyed the Father of Sin, Satan.
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.
(Ephesians 2:1-2)
Again, look at this in detail. "you were dead....when you followed the ways of the world and the ruler of the kingdom of air, the spirit at work in the disobedient".
Who is that?
If they followed God, they were not dead.
If they followed Satan, they were dead in their sins.
This is very clear.
There is a very clear
1Co 15:22 for as in Adam all die
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,
and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned-- (Romans 5:12) Adam and Eves first son Cain was a murderer, this was the result of the first sin.
Let us look at Rom 5:14.
Romans 5:14
King James Version (KJV)
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Death reigned even over them that had not sinned.
1st. Some did not sin, because death is the fruit of sin and yet Enoch and Elijah did not die. Therefore, they did not sin.
2nd. Others did not sin because death is the fruit of sin, yet although they did not sin, they died nonetheless. That would be people such as infants in the womb, children too young to know right from wrong and perhaps Mary and Jesus.
David said, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful at the time my mother conceived me."(Psalms 51:5)
We are all inherited with Adams sin.
1. We all inherit Original Sin.
2. But Original Sin is not a sin of commission. It is not something one did but something one inherits.
3. Adam and Eve were endowed with Original Justice. They were friends of God.
4. But when they committed the Original Sin, they turned their back on God.
5. They lost Original Justice and could not pass it down to their children.
6. They passed down their Original Sin, the condition of being at odds with God.
You do not have to teach a child to lie or to be disobedient; the child is disobedient by birth. We are sinners not because we sin, but we are sinners because we are sinners.
Children are born innocent. They have an inclination to sin. But they also have an inclination to do good. It is our job to show them that doing good is what God wants.
De Maria
See Mark 7:21-23. Also Genesis 6:5, Job 15:14, Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, Jer 17:9, John 6:44, John 6:64-65, Romans 8:7-8, 1 Cor 2:14, Titus 3:3.
ReplyDeleteThese are a lot to discuss. But I think Titus 3:3 makes my point. The regenerate were once unregenerate. They had to choose to be regenerated. Choose to accept God:
If they had to choose to be regenerated by God, then Jesus would become a liar in view of what he said in John 6:44, John 6:64-65. See also what St Paul says in Ephesians 2:1, Ephesians 2:5, 1 Peter 3:18.
We don't choose Jesus (God), he chooses us to follow him putting our complete trust in Him. True biblical salvation can only come to us when we are under conviction of the guilt of sin, realizing we are desperately lost, and putting our complete trust in the all sufficient atonement of Christ. Regeneration is the work accomplished the Holy Spirit the moment we believe the gospel (1 Cor 15:1-4). Ephesians 1:13 is clear on this.
Also to the saved because our souls are still housed in a fallen flesh. Are you saying that the saved are also free to do these thing?
No. That's why our flesh is dead and trips us regularly, but a born-again mans' spirit is quickened by the Spirit of Christ by being drawn to cross of Christ with empty hands of faith. That's why James is clear about the law in James 2:10. The fruits of the new birth is genuine love to follow Christ and repentance from sin. But if we stumble because of our human weakness, we have an advocate who intercedes for us. 1 John 1:9, 1 John 2:1.
This is humanism.
1. Humanism is atheism. Humanists do not believe in God.
2. I think you mean, Pelagianism.
3. Neither of those is Catholic Teaching.
Cannot anyone have a humanist view irrespective if he is an armenian in his views?
Pelagianism and also semi-Pelagianism was officially condemned at the council of Ephesus in 431. Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Synod of Orange in 529AD However Semi-Pelagianism never died, as it revived under the banner of Arminism. Arminianism, Peliagnism, Semi-Pelagianism and Roman Catholicism stand hand in hand in opposing Gods sovereign grace in salvation! Both place the final decision of the outcome of an individuals life completely in the hands of the man himself, and in so doing, deny God his rightful role as Creator and Sovereign of the Universe, simply because it has compromised on the central issue of Gods grace!
You said: Catholic Teaching says that without the grace of God, no one can choose to do good or to come to God.
So one one hand you admit we need God's grace and only he can regenerate us. But on the other hand you deny the exclusiveness of God and His sovereignty by stating man must choose to accept Christ for salvation. Please show me where in scripture does one have to make a decision to accept or choose Christ to obtain salvation.
BTW in the traditions teaching of the Catholic Church, the biblical "singular grace" is replaced by many graces. And this faulty teaching by RC Theologians does not line up with scripture.
Jason Fernandes
Hi Jason,
DeleteIf they had to choose to be regenerated by God, then Jesus would become a liar in view of what he said in John 6:44, John 6:64-65. See also what St Paul says in Ephesians 2:1, Ephesians 2:5, 1 Peter 3:18.
I don't see anything there which would make Jesus a liar.
1. God calls all men (1 Timothy 2:3-4).
2. But not all men will choose to obey God (2 Pet 2:20-22).
3. It is up to us to yield to God or to yield to sin (Rom 6:16).
We don't choose Jesus (God), he chooses us to follow him putting our complete trust in Him. True biblical salvation can only come to us when we are under conviction of the guilt of sin, realizing we are desperately lost, and putting our complete trust in the all sufficient atonement of Christ.
We don't choose Jesus. This is true. Jesus chooses us. But some, choose to reject God. Have you ever heard of Judas Iscariot?
John 6:70
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
Jesus also called Judas the Iscariot. Yet, Judas the Iscariot chose to reject Christ.
Regeneration is the work accomplished the Holy Spirit the moment we believe the gospel (1 Cor 15:1-4). Ephesians 1:13 is clear on this.
1 Cor 15:1-4 contradicts you blatantly. Read with me:
1 Corinthians 15:1-4
King James Version (KJV)
15 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you,
unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
If you are regenerated the moment you first believe, how can you believe in vain?
Nor does Eph 1:13 help you. Because it says "after" you believe. Not immediately after.
Now, lets consider St. Paul after he was knocked from his horse. Did he believe then? I think so. But let's say he didn't.
How about after the scales were taken from his eyes? Did he believe then? I think so.
But, if he believed when he was knocked off his horse or after the scales were knocked off his eyes, he was still not regenerated. He was regenerated after HE CHOSE to be baptized calling on the name of the Lord.
Acts 22:16
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Wash away they sins! That is regeneration (Titus 3:5).
cont'd
cont'd
DeleteNo. That's why our flesh is dead and trips us regularly, but a born-again mans' spirit is quickened by the Spirit of Christ by being drawn to cross of Christ with empty hands of faith. That's why James is clear about the law in James 2:10. The fruits of the new birth is genuine love to follow Christ and repentance from sin. But if we stumble because of our human weakness, we have an advocate who intercedes for us. 1 John 1:9, 1 John 2:1.
All that agrees with Catholic Doctrine. That is why we have the ministry of Reconciliation which is today the Sacrament of Confession.
Cannot anyone have a humanist view irrespective if he is an armenian in his views?
I'm not sure what you are talking about.
1. A Christian may be a humanitarian. In fact, a Christian MUST be a humanitarian.
2. But a Christian may not be a humanist. Because humanists do not believe in God.
At least, that is my understanding of the word:
Humanism is a group of philosophies and ethical perspectives which emphasize the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers individual thought and evidence (rationalism, empiricism), over established doctrine or faith (fideism).....
From Wikipedia
From personal experience, I've never met a humanist who believed in God.
3. I'm not armenian. Are you? Because if I'm not armenian and you are not armenian, I fail to understand why you keep bringing them up.
Pelagianism and also semi-Pelagianism was officially condemned at the council of Ephesus in 431. Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Synod of Orange in 529AD However Semi-Pelagianism never died, as it revived under the banner of Arminism. Arminianism, Peliagnism, Semi-Pelagianism and Roman Catholicism stand hand in hand in opposing Gods sovereign grace in salvation!
1. You are confused. The Catholic Church condemned Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism. Your denomination didn't exist then. The Catholic Church did and the Catholic Church condemned those and many other heresies which you and other Protestants continue to believe.
2. There are many forms of Armenianism. Armenia has its own country, language and even a separate Christian religion.
3. However, there is also an ARMENIAN rite within the Catholic Church which professes the Catholic faith which was passed down by Jesus Christ. It is one and the same faith I profess.
4. I have no idea which form of Armenianism you are talking about.
5. Catholicism believes and teaches that all which we do is by the grace of God. And it is the Catholic Church which condemned Pel and semi-pel. Get that in your head.
The Catholic Church is the true Church of Jesus Christ and anything else which you serve is a counterfeit.
cont'd
cont'd
DeleteBoth place the final decision of the outcome of an individuals life completely in the hands of the man himself, and in so doing, deny God his rightful role as Creator and Sovereign of the Universe, simply because it has compromised on the central issue of Gods grace!
God Himself puts the outcome in man's hands. Did God interfere when Adam chose to sin? Did God interfere when Cain chose to sin? Did God interfere when David chose to sin?
God didn't interfere when you cast aside the His Church and began to believe the fables of men.
God has given you the choice to believe or not. It is up to you.
So one one hand you admit we need God's grace and only he can regenerate us.
Correct. Without God's call, we can't choose Him. And even with God's call, we can't regenerate ourselves. God must call us. God must regenerate us.
But on the other hand you deny the exclusiveness of God and His sovereignty by stating man must choose to accept Christ for salvation.
Absolutely. Man must choose to do right:
Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
Please show me where in scripture does one have to make a decision to accept or choose Christ to obtain salvation.
Hebrews 5:9
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Matthew 7:26-27
King James Version (KJV)
26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
BTW in the traditions teaching of the Catholic Church, the biblical "singular grace" is replaced by many graces. And this faulty teaching by RC Theologians does not line up with scripture.
Yes, it does. Grace is a gift.
1 Corinthians 12:4
Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
Therefore, there are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit.
De Maria
BTW in the traditions teaching of the Catholic Church, the biblical "singular grace" is replaced by many graces. And this faulty teaching by RC Theologians does not line up with scripture.
DeleteI mean to say while the Bible tells us we are saved by grace, the Catholic Church says we are saved by graces. The Bible not only teaches that it is grace (singular, one act of God) that saves us, it also says that salvation is not by works.
Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.
Rom 4:2-6 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about-but not before God. 3 What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 4 Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5 However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
The Catholic Church, however, says that there are works of grace. While the Catholic Church agrees that we cannot merit for ourselves the initial grace of forgiveness, grace has been defined (outside of Scripture) other graces that we can and are supposed to merit for ourselves including the "graces needed for sanctification...and for the attainment of eternal life." So basically, to sound in line with Scripture the Catholic Church agrees that we are saved by grace through faith, but catholic church only means one grace as they have defined it to be the first work of many graces.
One can get easily deceived with "fine-sounding arguments" (Col 2:4). Just because Catholic Church use similar terminology does not mean The Catholic Church is teaching the same grace the scripture teaches, and as we can see, they are not. Below are some para numbers from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It points out some of Catholic teachings on grace. This does not line up with the Scriptures that reveal that grace (in the singular) saves us by faith, not by works.
paras #1989, #2000, #2003, #2010, #2016 on the subject of grace and merit.
I mean to say while the Bible tells us we are saved by grace, the Catholic Church says we are saved by graces.
DeleteThat's not true. The Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by grace.
The Bible not only teaches that it is grace (singular, one act of God) that saves us, it also says that salvation is not by works.
The Bible teaches that God saves those who do the works of God.
The Catholic Church teaches that God saves those who do the works of God.
The Protestants teach that people save themselves by their faith alone.
God does not save those who refuse to do good:
Romans 2:1-13
King James Version (KJV)
1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
You produced this verse out of context.
DeleteRom 11:6 And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.
When St. Paul says "by grace", he means by the Sacraments.
When he says, "by works", he means by the Old Covenant.
In the Sacraments, we present ourselves to Christ by faith apart from works. Christ pours His grace into our souls and washes and regenerates us.
By the works of the Old Covenant, means that one must wait to the Judgment Day, before one is saved by God if one has done good deeds, otherwise, that person will then be condemned.
Rom 4:2-6 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about-but not before God. 3 What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
DeleteProtestants try to make a lot of hay by this verse, "it was credited to him righteousness." But they take it completely out of context and invent an entirely foreign doctrine when they do so.
First, lets look at Romans to see if the same words are seen again. Read all the way to verse 22:
18 Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”[d] 19 Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah’s womb was also dead. 20 Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, 21 being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. 22 This is why “it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Why? Because he did what God told him to do. He got busy, even though his body was almost dead and Sarah was too old. They got together and had a baby. By Faith, he went to work.
Second, does Scripture show another time when this phrase is used? Yes. James 2:
James 2:21-25
New International Version (NIV)
21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[a] and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.
Again, Abraham was considered righteous for what he did. Not by faith alone.
Third,
Psalm 106:29-31
King James Version (KJV)
29 Thus they provoked him to anger with their inventions: and the plague brake in upon them.
30 Then stood up Phinehas, and executed judgment: and so the plague was stayed.
31And that was counted unto him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore.
Why was it counted to him for righteousness. Because he executed judgment on the enemies of God. Not by faith alone.
4 Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5 However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
David is a great example of the grace given in confession. David repented of his sin before Nathan. And Nathan declared to him that he was forgiven by God.
This is a foreshadowing of confession before a priest. Confession is a sacrament wherein Sacramental grace is bestowed to the repentant sinner.
We can't automagically expect children to follow God if their not trained according to God's will as laid out in scripture.
ReplyDeleteAmen! But training does not regenerate them. The Washing of the Holy Spirit regenerates them.
True! Training or guidance that is needed to build their foundation, then the Holy Spirit will do the work to kindle the love of Christ. At the same time respecting God's sovereignty. Guidance is to lay the foundation in their lives guided by the Holy Spirit through the written Word of God (Acts 8:30-31). The importance of Spiritual discernment knowing without the proper guidance their lives can be remotely controlled by a different Spirit other than the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.
Jason,
DeleteYou said:
True! Training or guidance that is needed to build their foundation, then the Holy Spirit will do the work to kindle the love of Christ. At the same time respecting God's sovereignty. Guidance is to lay the foundation in their lives guided by the Holy Spirit through the written Word of God (Acts 8:30-31).
Through the Teaching of the Church and the written Word of God. (Heb 13:7; Eph 3:10, 2 Tim 3:15-16).
The importance of Spiritual discernment knowing without the proper guidance their lives can be remotely controlled by a different Spirit other than the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.
Agreed.
Importantly, we need to also look at the faith of those parents who brought their children to Christ - believing in him, knowing he is GOD who is ALL ABLE.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely! That is why we believe in infant Baptism.
Children are sinners
Children are incapable of sin until they acquire they understand right from wrong.
Baptism does not bring them to Christ as YOU have rightly pointed out that Children are incapable of sin until they acquire they understand right from wrong. Likewise they need to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be saved. St Paul said he did not come to Baptize but preach 1 Corinthians 1:17. That is why parental guidance is required to point them ONLY to Christ. 3000 souls were saved on the day of Pentecost only they believed the Gospel when St Peter preached it. They were later baptized.
Hi Jason,
DeleteAnonymousMarch 14, 2013 at 5:27 AM
Baptism does not bring them to Christ as YOU have rightly pointed out that Children are incapable of sin until they acquire they understand right from wrong.
Baptism makes us children of God. Even little children are regenerated in Baptism.
Likewise they need to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be saved.
True. That is why we all have teachers even after we are Baptized. That is why the Apostles continued to teach their flocks even after they had baptized them.
St Paul said he did not come to Baptize but preach 1 Corinthians 1:17.
But he did not deny the necessity of Baptism. And he led all whom he taught to the Church to be baptized.
Acts 16:
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. 32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
That is why parental guidance is required to point them ONLY to Christ. 3000 souls were saved on the day of Pentecost only they believed the Gospel when St Peter preached it. They were later baptized.
No. You're changing the order of things.
First they are baptized. They receive the Holy Spirit, in Baptism. Only then can they be saved.
Acts 2:
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.....
47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
3000 souls were added to the Church once they were baptized. These were they that should be saved.
St Paul said he did not come to Baptize but preach 1 Corinthians 1:17. But he did not deny the necessity of Baptism. And he led all whom he taught to the Church to be baptized.
DeleteTrue. But he maintained/established the priority first:
PREACH THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST -> BAPTIZE. And not the opposite.
To adults. Once the adults are Baptized, they are free to have their children Baptized as well. The sons and daughters of Christians are Christians also. Therefore, they are Baptized.
DeleteIf they choose to leave Christianity later, they are free to do so. But in the meantime, God grants us the right to protect them from Satan by Baptizing them in the waters of Grace.
Remember Jonah said, Salvation is of the LORD. (Jonah 2:9) What made Jonah to say this? He did not go to a seminary or a theological school to understand but he learned in humility in the belly of a fish. On one side we see Nineveh where people were extremely wicked. Then on the other hand we see a disobedient prophet as Jonah was pretty scared to go to Nineveh to preach repentance. We see extremely wicked people on one side and a disobedient prophet on the other side. From human perspective there is no way for people of Nineveh to repent. However Gods will, his decree overpowered Jonahs will. No wonder Jonah cried out, Salvation is of the Lord. All the glory goes to God and not to man.
ReplyDeleteToday almost all Christians believe that only by grace alone the sinner is saved. But when you go a little deeper they say God did his part and now man has to do his part, or man has to cooperate with Gods grace. This is Roman Catholic doctrine. This is not grace ALONE. This is grace + works = salvation.
Joh 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God
AnonymousMarch 14, 2013 at 11:10 AM
DeleteRemember Jonah said, Salvation is of the LORD. (Jonah 2:9) What made Jonah to say this? He did not go to a seminary or a theological school to understand but he learned in humility in the belly of a fish. On one side we see Nineveh where people were extremely wicked. Then on the other hand we see a disobedient prophet as Jonah was pretty scared to go to Nineveh to preach repentance. We see extremely wicked people on one side and a disobedient prophet on the other side. From human perspective there is no way for people of Nineveh to repent. However Gods will, his decree overpowered Jonahs will. No wonder Jonah cried out, Salvation is of the Lord. All the glory goes to God and not to man.
Note that Jonah chose to disobey.
Note that the Ninevites chose to repent.
Note that Jonah changed his mind and chose to obey.
God leaves the final decision to us. And we have the choice to obey or not, to our dying day:
Ezekiel 18:
King James Version (KJV)
23 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? 24 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? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
Today almost all Christians believe that only by grace alone the sinner is saved. But when you go a little deeper they say God did his part and now man has to do his part, or man has to cooperate with Gods grace. This is Roman Catholic doctrine.
Correct.
This is not grace ALONE.
Correct. The Catholic Church does not teach grace alone.
This is grace + works = salvation.
The Catholic Church teaches that all is grace. Even our works are God's grace. Because it is God who works through us.
(Philippians 2:11-13)
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
Joh 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God
Correct. We are born again in Baptism.
Joh 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God Correct. We are born again in Baptism.
DeleteSt.Paul says we are born again the moment we trusted the Gospel of our salvation (Ephesians 1:13). So I believe only in St.Paul's teachings (which are the infallible and inerrant Word of God) - who is the Apostle of God by direct revelation of Jesus Christ, a Saint and not your teachings that come from traditions of men.
Note that Jonah chose to disobey.
DeleteNote that the Ninevites chose to repent.
Note that Jonah changed his mind and chose to obey.
Jonah chose to disobey because its the fallen nature at play. Ephesians 2:2. Only Gods Holy Spirit overcame him then he obeyed. Recall that in the OLD TESTAMENT the Holy Spirit was not a permanently in-dwelling feature - because Christ was not revealed as yet. One could lose it. That's why David cried take not away the Holy Spirit from me (Psalm 51:11). You see without an indwelling Holy Spirit you are a lost person.
The Ninevites repented after they believed God at the preaching of Jonah. And it was God that granted them the repentance.
Jonah chose to disobey
DeleteExactly! You have just proven yourself wrong.
because its the fallen nature at play. Ephesians 2:2.
We all suffer from that fallen nature. But not a totally depraved nature.
Only Gods Holy Spirit overcame him then he obeyed.
Then he chose to obey.
Recall that in the OLD TESTAMENT the Holy Spirit was not a permanently in-dwelling feature -
Exactly! Everyone in the Old Testament is unregenerate. And yet many had faith in God and pleased God. PROOF against your doctrine of TOTAL depravity.
because Christ was not revealed as yet. One could lose it. That's why David cried take not away the Holy Spirit from me (Psalm 51:11). You see without an indwelling Holy Spirit you are a lost person.
That is Catholic Teaching. And you have just contradicted yourself all over the place. Proving again that everyone has the free will to choose to accept the Holy Spirit. As you have depicted David asking God to remain with him.
The Ninevites repented after they believed God at the preaching of Jonah.
They chose to do so.
And it was God that granted them the repentance.
After they chose to do so. Not before. If it had been granted before, there would be no need for Jonah to preach.
St.Paul says we are born again the moment we trusted the Gospel of our salvation (Ephesians 1:13).
DeleteNo he didn't. You are reading that into the Scripture. St. Paul would not contradict Jesus. He said:
1 Corinthians 11:1
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
and Christ said:
rk 16:16
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Believe, baptized SHALL be saved. Saved comes last.
So I believe only in St.Paul's teachings (which are the infallible and inerrant Word of God) - who is the Apostle of God by direct revelation of Jesus Christ, a Saint and not your teachings that come from traditions of men.
On the contrary, we believe according to the Word of God which the Catholic Church wrote in the New Testament. Or, pray tell, which Scripture did Jesus Christ write?
I'll tell you the answer, "not one letter". Jesus established a Church and commanded that Church to teach His commands. It is that Church which continues to teach to this day. It is that Church which wrote the New Testament.
You can believe all the lies of the Protestants if you wish. But they are endangering your relationship with Christ.
If you believed St. Paul, you would believe Christ because he is a follower of Christ. He does not contradict Jesus.
and Christ said:
DeleteMark 16:16
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Believe, baptized SHALL be saved. Saved comes last.
So if a person does not believe, but is baptized in public, means obviously the person is lost. So baptism carries no weight whatsoever.
because Christ was not revealed as yet. One could lose it. That's why David cried take not away the Holy Spirit from me (Psalm 51:11). You see without an indwelling Holy Spirit you are a lost person.
DeleteThat is Catholic Teaching. And you have just contradicted yourself all over the place. Proving again that everyone has the free will to choose to accept the Holy Spirit. As you have depicted David asking God to remain with him.
Not applicable in the New Covenant of Grace thru the all sufficient atonement of Christ.
How did the Freedom of Will begin?
ReplyDeletePelagianism
Pelagius was a British monk who lived in the 4th century; he rejected original/inherited sin. Adams sin affected only Adam, others who are born after Adam are innocent in their birth and later on when they grow up, they have a free choice to sin or not. He believed there is no need for divine grace and man has the capacity to do the will of God. The Church ex-communicated Pelagius in 417 AD Augustine defended the church against the Pelagius heresy. Augustine believed that mankind is incapable of raising itself from the spiritual death, just like an empty glass cannot fill it self with water. Grace of God is needed for salvation. The Pelagian heresy was officially condemned at the council of Ephesus in 431, one year after Augustines death. (See Christian History Vol.6 No.3 by Philip Schaff)
Semi-Pelagianism
Semi-Pelagianism believes in the fall of man and the nature of man is changed by the fall. They believe the fallen sinner is not totally dead spiritually but only sick. The sinner still has an inherent goodness and righteousness. They believe that salvation is by Gods grace but the sinner has the ability to cooperate with Gods grace, this is done by the exercise of his will. Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Synod of Orange in 529 A. D. However Semi-Pelagianism never died, as it revived under the banner of Arminism.
Arminiasm
James Arminius was born in Holland in 1560. Although he was a Calvinist in his views, he was influenced by humanistic traditions. After Calvins death Arminius was greatly influenced by Beza, who took over the leadership of Calvin after his death, in Geneva. Arminius went back from Geneva to Amsterdam and became a famous pastor. However Arminius came to doubt Calvinistic doctrine and denied that predestination was unconditional. Then a bitter controversy sprang on this subject. After Arminius death his views were stated in the Arminian Article of Remonstrance. They made the 5 points of Arminiasm. As the controversy grew,. In November 13, 1618, 39 pastors, 18 ruling elders, 5 professors and 19 delegates were invited. It lasted for seven months and at the Synod of Dort, Arminism was unanimously rejected and condemned. The five theological points were formulated to answer the Arminian five points.
Today in our modern church the doctrines of Arminism have gained wide acceptance. And no one wants to question these evangelists and pastors, as the common lay people are not educated in Church history. But the theologians at that day rejected this doctrine. That is why the great men of God that day like Charles Spurgeon, Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards and others were not afraid to tell the truth to the people.
You're wrong. Freedom of will began when God made Adam and Eve. They freely chose to sin. In order to remedy that situation, we must freely choose to obey God.
DeleteThanks for informing me about James Armenius. I thought you were confusing the Armenian rite of the Catholic Church with something else. I couldn't figure that out.
Anyway, I'm not a follower of James Arminius. I'm Catholic. No need to mention that fellow anymore.
The Catholic Church follows Christ.
I truly apologise... its by mistake i typed the title - "How did the Freedom of Will begin?". I meant to give brief summaries on the sub-topics covered below it.
DeleteYou have Pelagianism right.
DeleteYou have semi-Pelagianism wrong. Semi-Pelagianism is the idea that man only needs God's grace part of the time. The Church also condemned semi-Pelagianism.
Arminism which you keep writing about is a form of Protestantism. Apparently, it is something which certain Calvinists consider a heresy. It has nothing to do with Catholicism. It is something that Protestants are fighting about amongst themselves.
Catholicism condemns all of the above. Catholicism teaches that God is the source of all grace. One of those graces is the ability to choose right from wrong. God does not coerce the grace of faith. He offers it to all but He permits us to either accept it or reject it.
Likewise they need to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be saved. True. That is why we all have teachers even after we are Baptized. That is why the Apostles continued to teach their flocks even after they had baptized them.
ReplyDeleteThe Biblical order is :
PREACH GOSPEL OF CHRIST -> BELIEVE/FAITH IN CHRIST WITH REPENTANCE TOWARD GOD (Acts 20:21) -> RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT (Ephesians 1:13) -> BE BAPTIZED AS FOLLOWER (NOT IMITATOR) OF CHRIST.
IT IS NOT:
BAPTIZE FIRST (Babies/Children who do not understand) -> PREACH THE GOSPEL
Apostles and now teachers needed to ground (establish their firm foundation) them in the truth of scripture and make sure they don't deviate from the apostolic faith that was once delivered to the Saints Jude 1:3
The Biblical order for Adults is believe first and then repent. Then be baptized and receive the Holy Spirit.
DeleteSt. Peter explains it here. In detail and in order:
Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them,
1. Repent,
2. and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,
3. and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
That is the command for adults.
St. Peter continues:
4. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children,….
That means that adults who have been regenerated in the grace of the Holy Spirit can bring their children to the fount of grace also to be regenerated.
Remember, Baptism replaced circumcision. Children could be circumcised when they were 8 days old. We have a better Covenant. Not a worse one. Our children can be baptized when they are born if necessary.
Besides, its ridiculous to leave your children in the power of Satan when you can rescue them immediately. The Protestant religion is totally depraved in that aspect.
St. Peter explains it here. In detail and in order:
ReplyDeleteActs 2:38
Then Peter said unto them,
1. Repent,
2. and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,
3. and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
That is the command for adults.
But in case Cornelius the first gentile he received the reception of the Holy Spirit first and then was baptised.
That means that adults who have been regenerated in the grace of the Holy Spirit can bring their children to the fount of grace also to be regenerated.
You mean so say that the Grace of the Holy Spirit that regenerated Adults is transfereable to their Children?
Remember, Baptism replaced circumcision.
Circumcision is of the Jews not the Gentiles. This means it is crystal clear from your statement that Catholicism certainly has is roots in Judaism and therefore cannot be Christian. Are you a Jew?
Gentiles are not under subject under the Jewish ritual of circumcision, that Baptism saves as preached by the Roman Catholic Church is a false gospel. See Galatians 2:1-3, Galatians 2:11, Galatians 2:14, Galatians 2:16.
But in case Cornelius the first gentile he received the reception of the Holy Spirit first and then was baptized.
DeleteTrue. But he is the exception that proves the rule. There is no other occasion where this happens in Scripture.
You mean so say that the Grace of the Holy Spirit that regenerated Adults is transfereable to their Children?
No. I mean that children can be baptized because of the faith of their parents. Just as Jesus would heal children because of the faith of their parents.
Circumcision is of the Jews not the Gentiles.
Gentiles who became Jews, were circumcised.
This means it is crystal clear from your statement that Catholicism certainly has is roots in Judaism
Amen! Jesus was born a Jew. And the religion He established is based upon the Ten Commandments of God, His Father:
Exodus 20:6
And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
John 14:21
He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
and therefore cannot be Christian.
Catholicism is the fulfillment of the Jewish religion.
Are you a Jew?
Yes, according to Scripture, Christians are inward Jews. Circumcized of the heart.
Romans 2:28-29
King James Version (KJV)
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Gentiles are not under subject under the Jewish ritual of circumcision, that Baptism saves as preached by the Roman Catholic Church is a false gospel.
Then you reject the Word of God:
Mark 16:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Acts 22:16
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
See Galatians 2:1-3, Galatians 2:11, Galatians 2:14, Galatians 2:16.
St paul is clar in his epistle to the galatians that we are not saved by either circumcision (a.k.a Baptism) as it is complete perversion of the gospel. Therefore Catholicism Gospel according to St.paul is "accursed" and has zero-power to save a soul.
ReplyDelete1. Circumcision is not Baptism.
Delete2. I've never seen that verse. Please produce it.
3. Scripture says,
1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
4. St. Paul is Catholic and teaches Catholic Doctrine. Your interpretation of his teaching is in error.
5. It is your teaching which is accursed and has zero-power to save a soul.
6. In fact, anyone who believes the errors you teach is in danger of losing his soul to Satan.
Circumcision is not Baptism
ReplyDeleteYou earlier said above that "Baptism" replaced "circumcision" - as a better covenant. Is is not true?
Jason
Hi Jason, You said,
DeleteAnonymousMarch 21, 2013 at 7:27 PM
You earlier said above that "Baptism" replaced "circumcision" - as a better covenant. Is is not true?
Yes. I did not say that Baptism is circumcision. I said that Baptism replaced circumcision.
When i made the statement - "Gentiles are not under subject under the Jewish ritual of circumcision"
ReplyDeleteI meant "physical" not "spiritual". In Galatians St Paul talks of the perversion of the Gospel he preached (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) wherein he rebukes false preachers making "physical circumcision" and "keeping the law of moses" as a mandatory requirement for salvation. We must note that nothing can be added to or removed from the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Doing so is a perversion of the gospel which has no power to save a soul. The Gospel at 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 does not also contain the word "baptism" as a requirement for salvation - so baptism does not save.
AnonymousMarch 21, 2013 at 7:38 PM
DeleteWhen i made the statement - "Gentiles are not under subject under the Jewish ritual of circumcision"
I meant "physical" not "spiritual". In Galatians St Paul talks of the perversion of the Gospel he preached (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) wherein he rebukes false preachers making "physical circumcision" and "keeping the law of moses" as a mandatory requirement for salvation. We must note that nothing can be added to or removed from the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Doing so is a perversion of the gospel which has no power to save a soul. The Gospel at 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 does not also contain the word "baptism" as a requirement for salvation - so baptism does not save.
1 Cor 15:1-4 is not the entire Gospel. The Gospel of Jesus Christ also says:
Mark 16:16
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Therefore, Baptism is a requirement for salvation, for the believer.
To take first things first, here is my translation of 1st Peter 3:21:
ReplyDeleteAnd it is [just] this true baptism [of the Spirit] which saves you. Not any [literal] washing away of filth from your flesh, but an appeal to God for a clean conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 1st Peter 3:21
The context of this verse is twofold:
1) Christ's pre-resurrection stay in Hades (specifically, in "Abraham's bosom" or paradise) during which time He made proclamation of His victory to the offending fallen angels of Genesis 6, this proclamation having been accomplished "by means of the Spirit" (v.19), "through which" Holy Spirit He was resurrected (v.18).
2) The "baptism" of Noah and his family "into the ark" which forms an analogy to our baptism into Christ.
... Peter brings the whole period to a conclusion in verse 21 by comparing our salvation through the Spirit's baptism to Christ's resurrection by means of the Spirit in verse 18. This is complicated, I know, so let me give a synopsis of these verses to try and bring the argument out in a more understandable way, keeping in mind that the two-fold main idea here is first the power of the Spirit for deliverance our Lord, our exemplar and Savior and for us, and, second, the Spirit’s means of accomplishing this for us, the baptism by which are made one with Christ, which is foreshadowed by the entrance of the righteous into the ark:
v.18: Christ died for us, but was resurrected by the Spirit's power, and
v.19: by the Spirit's power He proclaimed victory to the imprisoned spirits,
v.20: who offended when Noah was saved through a symbol of Spirit baptism (the ark),
v.21: just as we are now saved by Spirit baptism through Christ's resurrection.
Verse 21 answers verse 18: as Christ was resurrected through the Spirit, so we are saved by being united to Him in resurrection by the Spirit.
Verse 20 answers verse 19: as Christ was empowered to preach to the disobedient men and women in Noah's day through the Spirit, so the righteous of that day were saved in the ark, a type of Christ in whom we are by the Spirit.
Verse 18 complements verse 19: It is the power of the Spirit that took Christ to Hades, and it is that same power of the Spirit that raised Christ.
Verse 21 complements verse 20: Noah and his family were saved in the ark, a type of being saved by being in Christ through the Spirit, and in the true antitype we are saved by actually being in union with Christ through the Spirit.
Peter needed to add the "Noah argument" to keep this construction parallel, because while both Christ in His humanity and believers are resurrected by the Spirit’s power, we can be baptized into Him but not the other way around (so that the "baptism into the ark" is added both for the sake of analogy, and to add a second instance of the Spirit’s power working for Him in his humanity, also one which applies only to Him and not to us). This approach also allows Peter to explain the truth about baptism in general and to do so in a delicate way so as to avoid offense. To take the essential argument in reverse (i.e., working backward from verse 21 to verse 18 and expanding the translation to make the issues more understandable), I would paraphrase this section as follows:
Cont'd:
ReplyDeleteWater baptism doesn't save you. No, rather it is the Spirit's baptizing you into Christ following your calling upon God in repentance and in faith in Jesus and His resurrection that saves you as God answers your prayer for a clean conscience before Him: it is repentance and faith that saves you, not any literal washing off of the dirt on your body but the washing of your hearts through repentance and faith, for this is the true baptism, the baptism of the Spirit which follows your repentance and faith. Now the baptism of the Spirit is analogous to the "baptism" that Noah and his family experienced, for they entered the ark as you entered Christ, and they were really saved by this entrance into the ark rather than by the water which destroyed the world, just as you are really saved by your entrance into Christ through the Spirit rather than by any literal water administered in ritual ... yes, and Jesus has proclaimed the victory of His cross through which you have been saved, and He did so through the power of the Holy Spirit, the same Spirit that three days later resurrected Him, even though He had died for your sins, once and for all, the Just for the unjust, to bring you to God [accomplished through your appeal for a clean conscience and faith in His resurrection and sealed by the Spirit baptizing you into Him. -1st Peter 3:21, 20, 19, 18 [reverse order expanded translation]
To put it into a "nutshell", these verses make the following points: 1) it is Christ's sacrifice which is the key to salvation; 2) that sacrifice is appropriated for salvation by repentance and faith in Him and His resurrection; 3) that salvation is sealed by the Spirit's baptism; 4) it is the baptism of the Spirit that is important in this process, not water baptism; 5) water baptism merely removes literal dirt, but the Spirit's baptism makes us one with Christ; 6) Noah's ark gives us an analogy of this, for just as he went into the ark by faith (a kind of "baptism") and was saved "in it", so we go into Christ by faith through the Spirit's baptism and are saved "in Him". This is Peter's equivalent to Paul's 1st Corinthians 1:17 ("For Christ did not send me to baptize"), and with an appropriate explanation: water baptism doesn't accomplish anything - it is the Spirit's baptism that is the key. One of the problems commentators, interpreters and people in general have had with understanding this passage is the failure to understand that the way the Bible uses baptizo is very often NOT one of merely dipping into water. For example, Paul does something very similar to Peter here at 1st Corinthians 10:2 where he says that all the Israelites were "baptized into Moses" - clearly no water there, rather they were "in Moses" (i.e., God considered them like Moses and delivered them in spite of their unworthiness, just as we are delivered in Christ when God sees Him instead of our unworthiness). Failure to see that the Bible uses "baptism" much more often in the figurative sense in the epistles than in the literal sense has caused many misunderstandings and false interpretations of scripture. Many people can't get beyond the water.
In 1st Peter 4:6, Peter continues this exact same refrain of the power of the Spirit and the importance of the spiritual dimension over that of the physical or literal one. Just as Christ was "put to death in the flesh" but "made alive by the Spirit", so God's first and best desire for all mankind is that they will come to realize in this physical life ("according to men") that they stand condemned before Him "in the flesh", in order that they may have eternal life ("according to God") "by the Spirit".
Hi Jason,
DeleteVery impressive. Thanks for the detailed explanation.
The first thing I'd like to ask you is, "why are you still Protestant?" Your explanation is so close to the Catholic Doctrine that it is very difficult to detect the difference.
Let me show you:
1215 This sacrament is also called "the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit," for it signifies and actually brings about the birth of water and the Spirit without which no one "can enter the kingdom of God."7
If you go to that page in the Catechism, I think you'll find your explanation amazingly close to the Catholic Doctrine on Baptism.
The second thing I'd like to ask you is this. Can water heal the sick? In the OT (2 Kings 5:9-15), Naaman did not believe that he could be healed by water. Yet God worked through water to heal Naaman's leprosy.
In the NT, Jesus said, "which is easier to say, your sins are forgiven or get up and walk?" (Matthew 9:5). Thereby proving that it is just as easy for God to heal a body as it is for Him to forgive (i.e. wash away) sins.
The third thing I'd like to ask you is this, is God incapable of washing away sins by pouring or bathing in water? Is water more powerful than God?
The fourth thing I'd like to ask you is this. If you believe in Abraham's bosom, the place where certain spirits were held in the after life. Why do you not believe in Purgatory? It is essentially the same thing.
The basic difference between your understanding and the Catholic understanding on Baptism is that we believe that God has tied the washing of the Holy Spirit to the washing of Baptism. Whereas, you don't.
In other words, the Spirit blows where it will, therefore, it is possible that God may have Baptized anyone by the Holy Spirit. God knows.
However, we believe that the washing of Baptism signifies and brings about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Sincerely,
De Maria