Will you let the bible ...

[fhansen]

I'm wondering if you aren't actually thinking, instead of what you wrote, "...only He can fulfill it in us as we turn to Him in faith and remain in Him, cooperating with His work in us." you actually mean, "...He can fulfill it in us only as we turn to Him in faith and remain in Him, cooperating with His work in us."

This cooperative effort for a greater effect than the effort of God alone, really contradicts the meaning of Grace, in the Gospel.

As Augustine once put it, "He who created you without your consemnt does not save you without your consent". Even the Doctor of Grace understod man's abilty to say no to grace, to God, even as we have no means to muster a yes on our own. We cannot posibly save ourselves; we're lost and wouldn't even know where to start. We cannot move ourselves towards God. But we can always say no to Him when He comes to us. And that's the entire reaiosn why the bible even exists, why we need revelation/knowledge, to inform us, and why the drama of human life with its evil and suffering has a purpose. Becuase of the critical role, small as it may be, that the human will must play.

 

[Hammster]

As Augustine once put it, "He who created you without your consemnt does not save you without your consent". Even the Doctor of Grace understod man's abilty to say no to grace, to God, even as we have no means to muster a yes on our own. We cannot posibly save ourselves; we're lost and wouldn't even know where to start. We cannot move ourselves towards God. But we can always say no to Him when He comes to us. And that's the entire reaiosn why the bible even exists, why we need revelation/knowledge, to inform us, and why the drama of human life with its evil and suffering has a purpose. Becuase of the critical role, small as it may be, that the human will must play.

You get a tiny bit of credit.

 

[fhansen]

I post in context. I don’t take pet verses and throw them together as if it’s an argument. That’s how hermeneutics is done.

Get real. How did I do anything different from yourself when you post passages to support a position? Again, what do you want me to do, post all of Romans? As it is everything I posted fits perfectly with the whole context of that epistle. And with the rest of the new testament. And with the rest of the bible. And I dont need to have Jesus speaking out of one side of his mouth to different audiences, or Paul either, and from the other side when they say things that don't quite fit with our preferred theology.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

As Augustine once put it, "He who created you without your consent does not save you without your consent". Even the Doctor of Grace understood man's ability to say no to grace, to God, even as we have no means to muster a yes on our own. We cannot possibly save ourselves; we're lost and wouldn't even know where to start. We cannot move ourselves towards God. But we can always say no to Him when He comes to us. And that's the entire reason why the bible even exists, why we need revelation/knowledge, to inform us, and why the drama of human life with its evil and suffering has a purpose. Because of the critical role, small as it may be, that the human will must play.

The Catholic Church teaches - has always taught - that we can do nothing without grace preceding, accompanying, and following our actions.

Yet I wonder what purpose is served by the constant demand from one Christians upon another to type some grace shibboleths.

Can't a conversation be conducted with the implied acknowledgement of the good faith of the interlocutor?

I see in your replies such an acknowledgement of good faith for which I am thankful. I hope to see it more in everyone's posts.

 

[Hammster]

Get real. How did I do anything different from yourself when you post passages to support a position? Again, what do you want me to do, post all of Romans? As it is everything I posted fits perfectly with the whole context of that epistle. And with the rest of the new testament. And with the rest of the bible. And I dont need to have Jesus speaking out of one side of his mouth to different audiences, or Paul either, and from the other side when they say things that don't quite fit with our preferred theology.

You posted verses without context, and put them together as if it were an argument. No context, no argument.

 

[fhansen]

You a tiny bit of credit.

If not, God should've just place His puppets in heaven or hell to begin with. Here's what His church teaches instead:

2007 With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everything from him, our Creator.

2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.

God has sovereignly deemed it good that man should play his part, for our highest good. So, after being freely justified, after man is given the gift of righteousness by virtue of union entered into with God by faith, after God's seed is planted into him, man must proceed to walk in that righteousness, that light, that grace or life of God imparted to him as a new creation, and grow in that righteousness as we grow nearer to Him. That's how we work out our salvation: together with Him. Or not-we can always turn back away from Him as well.

 

[fhansen]

You posted verses without context, and put them together as if it were an argument. No context, no argument.

You can keep repeating the same nonsense if you want, but that doesn't give any substance to your words.

 

[Hammster]

You can keep repeating the same nonsense if you want, but that doesn't give any substance to your words.

I can link to you posts to show that is what you have done.

 

[Hammster]

If not, God should've just place His puppets in heaven or hell to begin with. Here's what His church teaches instead:

2007 With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everything from him, our Creator.

2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.

God has sovereignly deemed it good that man should play his part, for our highest good. So, after being freely justified, after man is given the gift of righteousness by virtue of union entered into with God by faith, after God's seed is planted into him, man must proceed to walk in that righteousness, that light, that grace or life of God imparted to him as a new creation, and grow in that righteousness as we grow nearer to Him. That's how we work out our salvation: together with Him. Or not-we can always turn back away from Him as well.

Thanks for at least being honest and saying that you get credit. Personally, I don’t want to share credit with Christ. I’m not worthy to untie His sandals.

 

[fhansen]

Thanks for at least being honest and saying that you get credit. Personally, I don’t want to share credit with Christ. I’m not worthy to untie His sandals.

I want to do what He wants me to do. And if He wants me to become something of better worth, for His greater glory, that's ok too. That would be the nature of love anyway, to will the best for the other. And I still won't be worthy to untie His sandals, even if He were to call me "friend".

 

[fhansen]

I can link to you posts to show that is what you have done.

Whatever, you can make up your own tune to dance to, I guess, but even after adding more quotes, and tying them together with others, I've still received no reasonable response, just knee-jerk reactions.

 

[Hammster]

I want to do what He wants me to do. And if He wants me to become something of better worth, for His greater glory, that's ok too. That would be the nature of love anyway, to will the best for the other. And I still won't be worthy to untie His sandals, even if He were to call me "friend".

I want to do what He wants me to do. I’m just not going to credit it towards my salvation. It cheapens the cross.

 

[Hammster]

Whatever, you can make up your own tune to dance to, I guess, but even after adding more quotes, and tying them together with others, I've still received no reasonable response, just knee-jerk reactions.

In order to respond, I’d have to take each individual verse and show context. That takes a lot of time, and I don’t see the value since I’d run the risk of you just posting more verses out of context as a response. So I’d be doing all the heavy lifting.

 

[fhansen]

In order to respond, I’d have to take each individual verse and show context. That takes a lot of time, and I don’t see the value since I’d run the risk of you just posting more verses out of context as a response. So I’d be doing all the heavy lifting.

Sorry, but that's pretty much a non-response IMO. Anyway, the difference is between the theological lens through which we're reading Scripture. And I'm suggesting yours has been blurred.

 

[fhansen]

I want to do what He wants me to do. I’m just not going to credit it towards my salvation. It cheapens the cross.

I see the cross as God honoring our wills, for our greatest good, for His highest glory. The cross stands as a landmark that we navigate to, or avoid. And not all will bow before it. Either way He doesn't club us with it, but draws us to it, to its love, to its light, if we'll leave the darkness behind. All kinds of contingencies lsited in Sripture, all kinds of "If you will..", "If you'll come..."

 

[Clare73]

That speaks of the forgivness of sin. But
the overcoming of future sin is also necessary in order to gain eternal life

We are given eternal life in the new birth, which is our "resurrection" from spiritual death into eternal life.

-and that same sacrifice, by reconciling and uniting us with God as we turn to Him in
faith, brings us that power, that righteousness.

The sacrifice of Jesus brings forgiveness from our condemnation (Romans 5:18).
The power for the Christian life is a work of the Holy Spirit in the born again.

 

[Clare73]

The cross took away the sins of His people.
We don’t need to keep overcoming to be righteous.

Yes. . .because the righteousness of Jesus Christ was imputed/credited to us (Romans 4:1-11) at justification by faith apart from faith's necessary works (Romans 3:28).

 

[Clare73]

If justice were abstract and not concrete, then I would agree with you. But it seems to me that justice is concrete and is to be done rather than apprehended and not done. A justice conceived and not done is a kind of injustice. Thus, judgement is justice done and mercy is
holding back on the sentence of justice because mercy is love done to the unworthy.

Actually, mercy is justice being satisfied by someone else for my sake, which then allows mercy to be justly given to me because I am no longer guilty and under the penalty of justice.

Justice is always satisfied, always done, it is never held back by God.
If justice were not always done, God would be unjust.
That is why Jesus had to die, to satisfy God's justice so that God could be merciful to us according to his justice.

It's my rich uncle paying my fine up at the Courthouse that I may be released from jail.
I didn't have to pay the fine to get the mercy of release, but the fine had to be, and was, paid for the mercy of my release.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Actually, mercy is justice being satisfied by someone else for my sake, which allows mercy to be given to me.
Justice is always satisfied, always done.
If not, God would be unjust.
That is why Jesus had to die, to satisfy God's justice so that God could be merciful to us in his justice.

I do not agree that justice is always done, and I do not agree that mercy means substitution.

 

[Clare73]

I do not agree that justice is always done, and I do not agree that mercy means substitution.

Biblical demonstration to support your disagreement, that it may have merit. . .

Justice is always done with God. . .as God, in his manifold wisdom repeatedly demonstrated in the animal sacrifices of the OT, thereby allowing no room for misappropriating their meaning. . .i.e., the animal died in the sinner's place to pay the penalty (Leviticus 5:6, 7, 14, Leviticus 6:6, Leviticus 26:41, 43) for his sin. . .and they being the pattern/type/shadow of Jesus' sacrifice on the cross to pay the penalty for our sin.