Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Oh. What I get from you is that you haven't read much of the patristics-so you're reallly just guessing here. Anyway, they and I will follow Scripture together with the faith as it was received before a word of the new testament was written, while you will apparently continue to follow traditions of certain men based on private interpretations.
Again, "If you're convinced that Phil 2:13 means that the will of the elect have no role to play in their coming to and remaining in Christ, in that they must be totally and irressistibly "overhauled" first, then the term I used is not an exaggeration."
Where'd you get that? I acknowledege that he and you and I as individuals can be wrong. And I don't see you, for exampe, as being totally wrong, just significantly skewed towards a somewhat extreme view on justification, failing to take the whole picture into account.
The error of the Judaizers was far-reaching. The congregations were so ignorant back then, that Arius almost converted them all to his heresy, opposed almost singly by Athanasius, thus labeled "Athanasius against the world." Augustine fought against the Pelagian heresy, which corresponded with the Judaizer legal relationship with God. All that assumes that man is separate from God and ultimately gains salvation by his own works. To some degree, both the RCC and Orthodox denominations are tainted with it.
It's your misunderstanding of what I wrote that you conclude I'm not taking the whole picture into account, which is your bias speaking.
I deny your straw man. Here is the distinction and grand canyon of a difference: you think that man's will having a "role to play" means that when a person decides to repent and surrender to God, it is the man by himself making that choice. Whereas I am saying that God first made the choice to make that individual His own, then that person responded in faith and repentance. First they are born of God, then they do works as a result of their salvation. The difference is that you do works to gain salvation, but I do works because salvation is already accomplished for me.
Like I said before, most Catholic writers I've read appear to me to know more about Catholic tradition and "patristics" than they do about scripture. This is where our paths diverge.
No they arent. They're that same church that battled legalism, Arianism, pelagianism, Gnosticism, Nestorianism, Docetism, et al. This is why, for example, the very basis of Catholic theology on justification can be found firstly in the arguments of Augustine against Pelagianism- on the essential nature of grace.
Yes, God already has it all sorted out of course while we'll know for certain one way or the other upon meeting Him. Either way, no it's not the man making the choice totally on his own; rather it's the man prompted and helped and informed and moved by God. It's man allowing God, apart from Whom man can do nothing, in, when He knocks on our door. So the difference is that man can nonetheless still resist and say no-and, in fact, the gospel is violated unless for that freedom and the possiblilties it affords. If you're at all intetestd in really understanding and speaking responsibly about what the CC teaches on this I can point you to original source material.
Augustine wrote something like 2500 works, I believe. He was named a Doctor of the Church, because his contributions are so highly valued and esteemed. But no man defines Catholicism on his own so even Augustine has a teaching or two that the church doesn't agree with, or at least never accepted. I'm sure there are areas where you would disagree with him as well. But the Church, led by the Holy Spirit, defines Christian beliefs-that's the point. And that's no different, BTW, from how many, many, readers of Scripture view themselves.
The reformers confirmed their soteriology in Augustine's writings, so the modern RCC certainly doesn't go all the way with grace, thus you get the burden of having to save yourself and/or keep yourself through works, such as the sacraments, confession, and other RCC dogmas. But the idea you vehemently oppose is that grace is 100% God's work, excluding your "free-will" cooperation (i.e. your works). Thus you can't believe that salvation is all of grace, and that eternal life is really a free gift (unconditional). That's where you err, along with Trent and the other "only true church," the Orthodox.
I already know what the CC teaches, so I don't need your materials. Here is the error you are in, wherein you say: "man can nonetheless still resist and say no." Your error is not in the statement itself, but the assumption that man naturally has the ability to make the choice necessary to be saved, which is contrary to Paul's teaching in Rom. 3, Eph. 2, and 1 Cor. 2. The CC teaches that man's ability to chose righteousness in the sight of God has not been eradicated - IOW, man is not totally spiritually depraved. But Paul clearly says that everyone is dead in sin, and therefore it takes the act of God birthing someone spiritually in order for a person to have the faith that saves. Eph. 2:5 is Paul's definition/description of grace. Salvation is of the Lord, says Jonah, and that means it is all of Him.
The fact that the CC (which you call "the Church") teaches pergatory, meriting justification, baptismal regeneration, mariolatry, and other such errors proves that the CC has not been led by the Holy Spirit. The CC is not the "only true church," and neither is the EO.
The CCC states that only God should be worshiped and adored. Mary is a creature, not a god, and therefore should not be worshiped. The Bible does not instruct people to worship anyone other than God. To worship a creature, even one as exalted as Mary, is idolatry
Macabees is not in my Bible because it's not inspired text. In order for the CC to justify merited salvation, they had to invent a purgatory to purge sins through suffering that comes from some obscure statement in Macabees. This is the crux of CC error, formulating dogmas from erroneous interpretations.
