PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
You probably need to get to know Arsenios a bit better. I know him to be possibly the most intentionally humble poster on TOL.
:up:
ECT Why shouldn't I convert from Evangelical Protestant to Catholic?
- Thread starter RichRock
- Start date
You probably need to get to know Arsenios a bit better. I know him to be possibly the most intentionally humble poster on TOL.
:up:
Arsenios
Well-known member
I am old and tired and weakening fast...
Not to mention cranky and smelly...
And the end is near...
And all your accusations of me are true...
But I can only say, in my defense,
that compared to the sins you do NOT see in me,
these are trivial and inconsequential observances...
Jes' SAYIN'!
Arsenios
Nang
TOL Subscriber
I am not miffed at you; just alarmed, for we differ on a foundational biblical doctrine, and that disappoints me.
No doubt the split within Protestantism between Monergists and Synergists was ordained by God, for His own good reasons, but salvation is either contingent upon mans' choices and actions, or it is not. I believe it is not and I do not think any reconciliation of these differing views can be achieved.
The only reconciliation that is biblical, is reconciliation of sinners to access and relationship with God, through the choices and actions of Jesus Christ on their behalf.
This I totally agree with . . but what is synergistic about resting in Christ?
I do not think imputed righteousness is "inevitable." I believe it was/is forensic. The basis and legal grounds of imputed righteousness, was Jesus performing all of the Covenant of Works by sinlessly living under the Law and manifesting total obedience, unto death. That is the legal basis that alone allowed forgiveness and the imputation of His righteousness to clear our record and accounts with God.
His "character" that produces good works in us, is solely caused by the indwelling Holy Spirit, manifesting His own fruits in and through us.
Amen and amen. That is monergistic belief and that is the Reformed view.
Obviously, I differ, but I do not want to get into deep discussion on this here, for it would hi-jack Arsenios' thread.
I find no argument with our beings changed, nor the reality of being IN Christ, by faith. I simply do not consider obedience to be any kind of cause, but rather, 100% effect . . the effect of God's election of us for redemption, of the cross work of Jesus in His life, death, and resurrection, and our regeneration worked by the Holy Spirit who transferred us from death to everlasting life in Christ.
Sanctification, and all that is exhibited in our earthly life as Christians, is the result of the above, which is all of Him and from Him. Even our repentance and praxis of faith, is His gift of grace.
Respectfully expressed, with no spirit of miff included,
Nang
Arsenios
Well-known member
You are right - It takes FAR more EFFORT to get ANY humility out of my PROUD sorriness than just about anyone...
I tell ya, it can wear a guy out!
And then what you end up with...
Is a VERY small pile...
So I am not sure I have any at all...
Arsenios
Nang
TOL Subscriber
I love you G. despite our differences about how much you should be concerned about being as humble as Jesus. He loves your efforts even though He does not demand them or require them from you.
You are His (and mine) no matter what. Praise His grace that gives us the desire to be holy for He is holy. Amen.
Arsenios
Well-known member
I love you too, my friend...
You know, we agree that Salvation is BY Grace, but THROUGH the Faith of Christ... Does God somehow NEED us to enter the Faith of Christ and persevere to the end in order for Him to be able to save us? Of course not... But that is how He set up His Ekonomia of Salvation... He does not say we must be saved in order to repent and be baptized into Christ... Instead He says: "Disciple all the nations, baptizing them..." Paul did it, preaching the Cross, which is the narrow and straited Gate of suffering for Christ...
And in that suffering, we are to find Peace and Joy in Christ...
There is nothing like this Faith of Christ Who ASCENDED the Cross for our sakes...
God Bless you my friend...
And have a Nappy Ewe Here, I say!
Arseniso
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
It's not a practical difference at all. It's just that so few can see the false dichotomy of Monergism and Synergism.
It is not. This is what is so difficult for others to understand from both "sides".
It can, but it requires a specific understanding of the ontological Gospel. No man can initiate or effect his own salvation.
Of course, but virtually every disparity of doctrinal views in any particular area is in need of reconciliation.
I didn't indicate it was. I'm not a Synergist. But I'm not a Monergist, either. I know you can't fathom that, but it's true.
It' even more than that. It's not just identity as a status label. That's where the MADs have missed the boat. It's utter ontology. Identity is not ontology, it's ostension.
It seems so, and functionally it is. The difference is, I've been able to demonstrate Monergistic actuality to Arminians and they've renounced Syngerism.
Agreed.
It's both. Our boulomai (will) is transformed by God's thelema (will).
Agreed.
Of course.
Respectfully expressed, with no spirit of miff included,
Nang
Yes, I was confident of as much. :comeout:
VeritasEph2:8
New member
I am also beginning to consider conversion. I know very few Catholics, have never attended a mass, and am happy and satisfied in the non-denominational Evangelical church I attend. For me this journey began with a vacation in Italy last year, including a few days in Rome and visits to the Vatican and St Peter's tomb. I have always loved history, so I started reading some of the writings of the "Church Fathers" who were disciples of the apostles (Clement of Rome, Ignatius). I was surprised to find that the descriptions of the very early church sounded a whole lot like Catholicism. I think I imagined it to be more of a "Jesus movement". There are two doctrines that stand out to me from what I've been reading that seem much more in line with the Catholic faith than with Protestant theology, and these are baptism and communion. The early church really took these sacraments seriously. They believed that the bread and wine were the body and blood of The Lord, and baptism was essential to partake of communion. Then, I started re-reading the New Testament, especially the book of Acts, "in light" of what I was learning about the early church. I realized that I have read the Bible my entire Christian life through the lens of Protestant theology. This caused me to gloss over certain passages of Scripture which didn't seem to conform to what I believed, or else to interpret them "in light" of other passages. I don't know how many different Protestant denominations there are, not counting the Independent churches such as mine, but I think the differences between them are which Scriptures they emphasize and use to "enlighten" other Scriptures. We read current commentaries and inspirational books which influence how we interpret the Bible, but how many Protestants have read Ignatius? I didn't even know who he was until I went to Rome and heard how he was one of the martyrs who was thrown to the beasts. Perhaps his writings aren't read because he is revered as a Saint by the Catholic Church, so Protestants would prefer to read Charles Stanley or John mcArthur? But Ignatius was a disciple of the apostle John! He was appointed a bishop by Peter! Perhaps, he learned something from those men that will help us in our interpretation of the writings of the apostles? I still struggle with many of the teachings of the Catholic Church but have started reading some Catholic apologetics. I don't know where this will end, but if I had to guess right now I'd say I will likely eventually become Catholic. I'm praying daily for wisdom and discernment.
Cruciform
New member
I, too, am a convert from Evangelical Protestantism to the Catholic faith. After a lifetime in Evangelicalism---and after three years of in-depth study, prayer, and discussion with both Catholics and non-Catholics---I was finally compelled before God to enter Christ's one historic Catholic Church in the Spring of 2001. May God bless you and your family as richly as he has blessed mine.
If I were to recommend only one book for those considering and examining the Catholic faith, it would be this one:
Happy reading, and God bless!
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Salvation by grace alone rather than through grace and works. Jesus did the work.
Cruciform
New member
Amen. No one is saved by performing the works of the Torah Law Code. :thumb:
Doesn't Catholicism teach salvation through works?
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Along the lines of wisdom and discernment, see also...
http://tinyurl.com/pmu5gsx
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4325869#post4325869
Worth reading as you seek greater understanding.
AMR
VeritasEph2:8
New member
Cruciform, I've read that book. I just finished reading 'More Christianity' by Fr Dwight Longenecker, also very informative. If nothing else, I'm learning how many misconceptions I had about the Catholic Church.
Cruciform
New member
The good works that Paul relates to "eternal life" in Rom. 2:6-7 have nothing to do with the "works of the law" that he condemns in Rom. 3:28. Thus, Paul recognizes two different types of "works" (deeds, actions).
Therefore, the answer is "no," Catholicism does not teach "salvation by works" in the sense condemned by Paul and the other apostles. :nono:
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
Been there, brother! :thumb:
Cruciform
New member
Hi, Veritas. I have read this book, and made detailed doctrinal notes outlining the specific Protestant misrepresentations, distortions, and misconceptions that appear on nearly every page. If you decide to read Sproul's book, let me know and I'll be glad to share my material with you.
Also, if you have questions about any of the false dichotomies listed in the above source, I would be happy to weigh in on that as well. God bless.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
As you seek prayerful discernment, note that getting one's understanding of justification correct is vitally important.
Justification is a judicial act of God pardoning sinners (wicked and ungodly persons, Rom. 4:5; 3:9-24), accepting them as just, and so putting permanently right their previously estranged relationship with himself. This justifying sentence is God’s gift of righteousness (Rom. 5:15-17), his bestowal of a status of acceptance for Jesus’ sake (2 Cor. 5:21).
God’s justifying judgment seems strange, for pronouncing sinners righteous may appear to be precisely the unjust action on the judge’s part that God’s own law forbade (Deut. 25:1; Prov. 17:15). Yet it is in fact a just judgment, for its basis is the righteousness of Jesus Christ who as “the last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45), our representative head acting on our behalf, obeyed the law that bound us and endured the retribution for lawlessness that was our due and, to use a medieval technical term, “merited” our justification. Hence we are justified justly, on the basis of justice done (Rom. 3:25-26) and Christ’s righteousness reckoned to our account (Rom. 5:18-19). It can be said that our Lord's passive and active obedience unto death stands in before God for the sins of those who have been declared justified, as whimsically depicted here. Nothing the true believer thinks, does, or says, can make he or she worthy of salvation.
The necessary means, or instrumental cause, of justification is personal faith in Jesus Christ as crucified Savior and risen Lord (Rom. 4:23-25; 10:8-13). This is because the meritorious ground of our justification is entirely in Christ. In other words, our righteousness is an "alien righteousness"—that of another—Our Lord Jesus Christ. As we give ourselves in faith to Jesus, Jesus gives us his gift of righteousness, so that in the very act of “closing with Christ,” we receive divine pardon and acceptance which we could not otherwise have (Gal. 2:15-16; 3:24). This union with our Lord is irrevocable, for it is He who keeps us.
Official Roman Catholic dogma includes sanctification in the definition of justification, which Rome sees as a process rather than a single decisive event. Rome affirms that while faith contributes to our acceptance with God, our works of satisfaction and merit contribute too the acceptance of God. In fact, Rome pronounces any view that we are justified "by faith alone" as anathema:
Council of Trent Session 7, 1547
Canon 8. If anyone says that by the sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise is sufficient to obtain grace, let him be anathema.
Rome also sees baptism, viewed as a channel of regenerating (being "born again") grace, as the primary instrumental cause of justification (as opposed to faith), and the sacrament of penance, whereby congruous merit is achieved through works of satisfaction, as the supplementary restorative cause whenever the grace of God’s initial acceptance is lost through mortal sin.
Congruous, as distinct from condign, merit means merit that it is fitting, though not absolutely necessary, for God to reward by a fresh flow of sanctifying grace. Per the Roman Catholic view, therefore, believers save themselves with the help of the grace that flows from Christ through the Roman Catholic sacramental system, and in this life no sense of confidence in God’s grace can ordinarily be had. In effect, this view of Rome sets one on an ongoing treadmill of works that may or may not assure one of his ultimate salvation.
AMR
Cruciform
New member
Indeed it is. The real question is whether you will derive your doctrine of justification/salvation [1] from Christ's one historic Catholic Church, or [2] from one of the myriad recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects in existence today, with more being invented every week. I myself have to go with the authoritative teachings of that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D., and which has been commonly known from the 1st century as "the Catholic Church."
Regarding the Catholic Church's authoritative teaching about justification/salvation, see this, this, this, and this.
Finally, I also highly recommend this recently-published text on the doctrine of justification:
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Last edited:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
As I have noted, Rome's view is that justification is a process. At one of your "authoritative" links above (BTW, none, including Akin's claim and imprimatur): "...he enters into a process of justification and salvation requiring his free cooperation with God’s grace"
Q.E.D.
AMR
Q.E.D.
AMR