homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: The background of Calvinism (Page 8)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ...  14  15  16 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: The background of Calvinism
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamac:
Well you can't argue from context that it was anything else.

Actually, given that the text refers to "anyone" rather than "any nation", I think you have to make a fairly watertight argument from the context that it refers to a nation - and the context, to me, seems to be Pharisees who accused Jesus of working by the power of satan.

I don't see how that leads one to conclude a national sin is meant.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamac:
Well you can't argue from context that it was anything else.

Actually, given that the text refers to "anyone" rather than "any nation", I think you have to make a fairly watertight argument from the context that it refers to a nation - and the context, to me, seems to be Pharisees who accused Jesus of working by the power of satan.

I don't see how that leads one to conclude a national sin is meant.

The Pharisees had accused him of being demon possessed. They were the key leadership group of the time. After this he went private, started to teach in parables, demanded faith for healings.

Later he spoke over Jerusalem "Your house is left unto you desolate."

After this point the nation in Jesus mind had rejected him. The people always followed the leaders. To this day converting a Jew is difficult since "Well if he is the Messiah, why don't the Rabbis acknowledge him?"

It all seems pretty conclusive to me anyway MDJ

[ 21. September 2006, 10:16: Message edited by: Jamac ]

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
m-t-tomb:
Maybe I misunderstood your earlier post about how you can say with confidence to an enquirer, than God loves them and positively desires their salvation. I understood you as implying that the non-elect would not be enquiring after the gospel, since . .they are non-elect. This is all I am challenging and not main-stream calvinism,
and I think the case of JE shows this.

I maintain that a non-elect person will never cry out to Christ for salvation only to be turned away because in fact God hasn't chosen them. That is heresy and I do not beleive it. If that really is 'mainstream Calvinism' then I'm happy to say that I don't hold that view. However, I don't think it is mainstream Calvinism and I'm fairly confident that you've somehow misunderstood it. A reprobate hates God and sees no value in Christ whatsoever; Romans 8.7-8:
quote:
...the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
This describes a person before God regenerates them; dead in sin, hostile to God, incapable of pleasing him. Anyone who is truly reprobate stays like this from the cradle to the grave. They make no attempt to seek God because God has not called them to himself. John 4.44
quote:
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
Therefore I take this to mean what it says; anyone who makes an approach to Jesus must be elect because Jesus said that 'no-one can come to him unless the Father draws him'. Hence anyone who displays even the slightest inkling of interest in Christ must have received that from the Father. This is grace! Why? Because God doesn't have to call anyone; he would be perfectly justified if he left eveyone dead in sin. The problem with this, as Matt Black and others have pointed out, is that it raises the question, 'Why doesn't God call all?'.

[ 21. September 2006, 10:36: Message edited by: m.t-tomb ]

Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm sorry Jamac, but that all reads like speculation. There are very few hard links. One could make similar links between almost any parable or statement Jesus made and the Jewish nation. It may be that some Jewish leaders are guilty of such "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit"... but I really don't see that the passage appears exclusive to them or that situation... any more than the millstones around necks can be made specific to the Jewish nation.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
The problem with this, as Matt Black and others have pointed out, is that it raises the question, 'Why doesn't God call all?'.

Absolutely. It seems to me that the Calvinist view works fine if he does - not if he does't.

How do we know he doesn't? Or why do we think he doesn't?

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
I think that freewill kicks in after regeneration. This is the position of Calvinist and Arminians alike. Calvinist say that post regeneration saving grace is effectual because Christ's beauty is irresistible to the truly free, whereas Arminians say that regeneration restores free will so that subject then decides for or indeed against Christ. What Calvinists object to in this view is the suggestion that a person with perfect free will would ever choose to reject Christ. the Reformed view is that Christ is so very lovely that anyone with free will will choose him.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand (agree with) this bit: "Arminians say that regeneration restores free will so that subject then decides for or indeed against Christ."

I've never heard that before! Are you saying that a person is regenerate THEN has free will to choose or reject? Because if you are that is so not the case with Arminian/Wesleyan theology.

What I believe is that we are given prevenient grace which then allows the choice - but prevenient grace is not saving grace (regeneration).

Again, it seems that the stuff you disagree with is not actually what we believe.

Sorry to be a pest, but I really would like a comment on this one, please. I think it's important.

Ta. [Smile]

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Myrrh:

There is nothing Christian in Augustine if by Christian we mean it accords with Christ's teaching...

Its a weird kind of Orthodox that disagrees with the Fathers of the Church and accepts someone they considered a heretic while condemning somene they all accepted as an Orthodox and Catholic bishop!
Weird, but true.

The 'fathers' aren't infallible, the canons aren't laws, and we like to argue.

Myrrh

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
You no doubt wish they were! However, guilt by association won't wash in this case. St Paul was a Pharisee: apply the same logic to his theology and you lose a massive wodge of the New Testament!

You misunderstand me, that's exactly what I do and I don't lose an iota of it...


quote:
As for traducianism and the idea that sex itself is sinful: I don't think this washes. God created sex and I think that Adam and Eve enjoyed sex before the Fall. Had they pro-created before the fall their children would have inherited unfallen souls. However, they did fall and their flesh (note: not physical body per se) became hostile to God. This hostility to God is passed on generationally. Hereditary disease is passed on sexually but that doesn't mean that sex is evil. The sinful nature is passed on generationally - through the sexual act - but that doesn't make the sexual act bad at all! In fact it really doesn't change anything in reality because everyone shares the fallen nature of Adam and Eve: it's just the way things are.
When did they become hostile to God?

Perhaps we need another thread to explore Original Sin, but Augustine's misreading of the event and his extrapolation from that to the idea we're all born in a completely sinful nature, estranged from God and condemned to hell was an innovation and makes nonsense of the history of our patriarchal and matriarchal beginnings with Abraham and Sarah. Both show a close relationship with God, as Adam and Eve continued to have, and Abraham particularly is well known for the description of him as friend of God. Even Paul the Pharisee had heard yer bog standard teaching:

Micah 6:8
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?


Augustine is a heretic because he invented a whole new concept of God and mankind's relationship to him, but especially because he insisted on imposing his views onto the Church. I'm sure Christ makes sense to people whatever their views, but Christianity doesn't make sense in the limitations of his thinking.


Myrrh

[ 21. September 2006, 12:03: Message edited by: Myrrh ]

--------------------
and thanks for all the fish

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Myrrh:


Augustine is a heretic because he invented a whole new concept of God and mankind's relationship to him, but especially because he insisted on imposing his views onto the Church. I'm sure Christ makes sense to people whatever their views, but Christianity doesn't make sense in the limitations of his thinking.


Myrrh

Tangent: And yet the entire church sacramental system is built on his definition that a sacrament is the visible sign of an invisible grace - something the Bible knows nothing about.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
For people who accuse Calvinists of theological totalitarianism you Orthodox seem to be doing a lot of anathematising!

I can just imagine you all, bearded and zealous, ecstatically capering around a well built bonfire...

[ 21. September 2006, 12:32: Message edited by: m.t-tomb ]

Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Myrrh asked:
quote:
When did they (Adam and Eve) become hostile to God?
Answer: At the point of first disodedience. Question: At what point does something become polluted? Answer: When a pollutant is introduced.

Adam's disobedience caused the pollution of humanity.

[ 21. September 2006, 12:41: Message edited by: m.t-tomb ]

Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And
quote:
Mudfrog asked

quote:

Are you saying that a person is regenerate THEN has free will to choose or reject? Because if you are that is so not the case with Arminian/Wesleyan theology.

What I believe is that we are given prevenient grace which then allows the choice - but prevenient grace is not saving grace (regeneration).

Again, it seems that the stuff you disagree with is not actually what we believe.

Sorry to be a pest, but I really would like a comment on this one, please. I think it's important.

Ta. [Smile]

To which M.T-Tomb responded:

[Snore]

Nothing.
[code]

[ 22. September 2006, 03:04: Message edited by: John Holding ]

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Astro
Shipmate
# 84

 - Posted      Profile for Astro   Email Astro   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I wonder how much philosophy influences theology (or is it vice versa) - around teh time that Calvinism became popular Philosphy took a very Determinist viewpoint (e.g. Spinoza - who was a Jew) not really allowing much room for free-will.

Mid 20th century along come Mr "Free Will" Satre and very Arminian Pentcostalism becomes popular.

Any link?

--------------------
if you look around the world today – whether you're an atheist or a believer – and think that the greatest problem facing us is other people's theologies, you are yourself part of the problem. - Andrew Brown (The Guardian)

Posts: 2723 | From: Chiltern Hills | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
anteater

Ship's pest-controller
# 11435

 - Posted      Profile for anteater   Email anteater   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
m-t-tomb:
We may be in danger of generating our own provate dead horse here. Let me return to your statement that I am challenging:
quote:
The idea that a person might want to be saved but in fact not be one of the 'chosen' is anathema to me and to Calvinism. The unelect never want to be saved and have never wanted to be saved. The possibility of Christ has never for one moment even crossed their minds.
This is where I think you are mitigating the harshness of predestination by implying that the non-elect don't give a **** for christianty, whereas mainstream calvinism as always accepted that many many people have a great concern for salvation, and become members of believing churches (in some case even Pastors), and yet fall back into apostasy, or even die in their belief that they are saved, when all they have is a nominal christianity.
Of course you could say they've "never cried to Christ" - leaving aside that that's not a biblical requirement - because what they have done in their innermost soul is forever beyond your ken.
If you are prepared to state that according to the tenets of your version of calvinism, it is inconceivable that any member of your own church is reprobate, then you are right in stating that your strand of calvinism is different from what I know (which was straight Banner of Truth, so not extreme). If you accept the possibility that members of your church could be reprobate, I think that contrasicts your view that the non-elect give no thought to Christ.

--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.

Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252

 - Posted      Profile for Divine Outlaw   Author's homepage   Email Divine Outlaw   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Astro:


Any link?

Whilst it is true, of course, that theology is influenced by contemporary theology; it is also true that each is influenced by more general patterns of social existence at any given time.

--------------------
insert amusing sig. here

Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
[Tangent: And yet the entire church sacramental system is built on his definition that a sacrament is the visible sign of an invisible grace - something the Bible knows nothing about.

I think Priest Gregory would be more familiar with the differences/similarities between Orthodox and Protestants here, but I think this doesn't quite capture Orthodox understanding which doesn't make the division between sign and grace that's made here. Anyway, all the Church's work is sacramental and this limitation to 7 isn't Orthodox.

Myrrh

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Mudfrog, I'll answer I promise. I'm just a bit busy with work at the moment.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This is true Myrrh (the sign thing and 7). Orthodox only started defining 7 under Latin influence in Eastern Europe and the Ukraine in the 18th century. There are certain mysteries that are appointed as such in the ministry and liturgical celebration of the Church (including Theophany Great Blessing of the Waters it seems to me - making 8) and others that could be called sacramentals in the sense that they are derivative or occasional, (monastic tonsure for example).

The definition of a sacrament as "an outward and visible sign of an inward spiritual grace" is historically Anglican in form (although adopted by others) and Protestant in character. The main problem with it is that it interiorises the grace and neglects the communal / ecclesial dimension of the Spirit. Basically though of course, Orthodox do not like such definitions. Mysteries are to be "done" not argued over or wrapped up in nice little parcels.

Back to Calvinism ...

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
For people who accuse Calvinists of theological totalitarianism you Orthodox seem to be doing a lot of anathematising!

I can just imagine you all, bearded and zealous, ecstatically capering around a well built bonfire...

I can't think of any time the Orthodox Church built bonfires to obliterate those which disagreed with it. Perhaps because we didn't have Augustine who first justified violence against heretics as acceptable Christian practice, so incidents of un-Christian violence were never dogmatised as part of the faith. The RCC developed Augustine's idea to the nth degree..


Orthodox understanding of Anathema:
quote:
St John (Maximovich)The Word Anathema and its Meaning
Myrrh

--------------------
and thanks for all the fish

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
For people who accuse Calvinists of theological totalitarianism you Orthodox seem to be doing a lot of anathematising!

I can just imagine you all, bearded and zealous, ecstatically capering around a well built bonfire...

This would fit better on the hell thread than the purg thread, surely?

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
Myrrh asked:
quote:
When did they (Adam and Eve) become hostile to God?
Answer: At the point of first disodedience. Question: At what point does something become polluted? Answer: When a pollutant is introduced.

Adam's disobedience caused the pollution of humanity.

God's fault then, since he predestined it...

Where does Scripture show we were incapable of doing good before Christ? Where is the teaching in Holy Scripture that we have a totally depraved nature utterly separated from God? Nowhere. Except in Augustine's mind.


Orthodox teaching is that we are created in the image and likeness of God with free will. God having given us free will is acting against it if he demands obedience.


There is no original sin of disobedience in this except in the reading of Augustine's juridical relationship with God. God did not kill them for disobedience, this is Augustine's misreading and the direct cause of the "caricature" of God as wrathful ever after to his creation in that he condemned all of it to everlasting hell unless they became Christian. It's nonsense and all very sad as the real consequence of Augustine's doctrine is the centuries of captivity to another man made creation of a 'pagan' God. And this theme continued in the idea that God required a perfect sacrifice for our sins...

God doesn't require sacrifice - Isaiah.

Myrrh

--------------------
and thanks for all the fish

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
For people who accuse Calvinists of theological totalitarianism you Orthodox seem to be doing a lot of anathematising!

I can just imagine you all, bearded and zealous, ecstatically capering around a well built bonfire...

This would fit better on the hell thread than the purg thread, surely?
I agree. It would have been great on the hell thread! However, it wasn't meant nastily; just as friendly jibe. The point remains though; I don't think I've resorted to the words heretic or heresy on the ship in, oooh, days. That's got to make me more tolerant of differnce, surely. [Biased]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can just imagine you raping a 12-year old schoolgirl.

Just a friendly jibe there.

I'm not buying it.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You know, the other thing I've always wondered about Calvinism is.... sorry, more tea vicar?

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Myrrh:
I can't think of any time the Orthodox Church built bonfires to obliterate those which disagreed with it.

You never read much Russian history then. Hundreds of thousands have been killed in the name of Christ by people claiming to be Orthodox Christians. Old Believers, Doukhobors, and of course Jews.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That is certainly true, to our great shame.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Myrrh asked:
quote:
Where does Scripture show we were incapable of doing good before Christ?
Here goes...

quote:
[T]he sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. Romans 8.7-8
quote:
As for you (that's Christians), 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. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts (see Romans 8.8 above). Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive (i.e. God raised us, like Jesus raised Lazarus) with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this (i.e. faith) not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2.1.-9
quote:
[E]verything that does not come from faith is sin. Romans 14.23b
quote:
He who does what is sinful is of the devil (see Ephesians 2.1-2), because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God (see Romans 8.8 above); nor is anyone who does not love his brother. 1 John 3.10
Must I continue? I'm sure Gordon Cheng would enjoy reading this post but it might be a little dry for some!

[ 21. September 2006, 15:52: Message edited by: m.t-tomb ]

Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
All of those quotes describe the sinful nature of humans. I think all would be agreed. But none of them finish off with "and can therefore do no good unless elected and given grace".

But even were that so, I'm still unclear as to why we can't believe that all are called - all are "elect" - all have a chance to respond.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
sharkshooter

Not your average shark
# 1589

 - Posted      Profile for sharkshooter     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
All of those quotes describe the sinful nature of humans. I think all would be agreed. But none of them finish off with "and can therefore do no good unless elected and given grace".

Read the first one again.

quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
... I'm still unclear as to why we can't believe that all are called - all are "elect" - all have a chance to respond.

You can. I have no idea who or how many are "elect", and I don't think anyone else does either.

--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]

Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
I can just imagine you raping a 12-year old schoolgirl.

Just a friendly jibe there.

I'm not buying it.

Well if you want to take offence then so be it. I'd be sad if you did though.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
sharkshooter

Not your average shark
# 1589

 - Posted      Profile for sharkshooter     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
... I'd be sad if you did though.

Don't be - he gives offense at least as much as he takes it.

--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]

Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Read the first one again.

Ok. Now what?

[To expand, it doesn't say that all are controlled by the sinful nature, all cannot turn to God but that he predestines them to. I'd see that verse as perfectly consistent with the idea that someone has freewill to give their control over to either their sinful nature or to God, for instance. There are other interpretations, I'm sure.]

[ 21. September 2006, 16:53: Message edited by: mdijon ]

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
How many dead people do you know that are capable of deciding to come to life, mdijon? How many dead people do you know that whose wilful cooperation is necessary for them to be resuscitated? That's what Paul says new birth is like: it's like being raised from the dead (see Ephesians 2).

Paul is perfectly clear that anything that does not proceed from faith is sin: even great acts of philanthropy, if done by an atheist, aren't pleasing to God, in the sense of them being something to commend a person to him.

[ 21. September 2006, 17:02: Message edited by: m.t-tomb ]

Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't think you can expect every aspect of the metaphor to fit.

For instance, dead people don't sin. Yet clearly that isn't the intent of the metaphor.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Having said that, I've been back and read through to the end again... it is quite a powerful passage, and I'm coming round to the idea that one requires grace in order to respond.

In fact, I'm not sure I really oppose that at all - I'd oppose the idea that there was no synergy - no cooperation at any stage - but I don't think you're arguing that... and I'd oppose the idea that some are predestined never to be raised from the dead...

I'll read it again.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Still waiting.
You're not that busy M.T-Tomb, because you keep replying to other people.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jason™

Host emeritus
# 9037

 - Posted      Profile for Jason™   Author's homepage   Email Jason™   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Mudfrog, that he's promised you a reply at all is far more than you would get from most people, and exceptionally more than anyone here deserves. I would just be grateful and patient--I don't always get along with m.t- but I'm pretty sure he'll keep his word.

Digory

Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
sharkshooter

Not your average shark
# 1589

 - Posted      Profile for sharkshooter     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Still waiting.
You're not that busy M.T-Tomb, because you keep replying to other people.

Is your face turning blue?

--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]

Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Papio

Ship's baboon
# 4201

 - Posted      Profile for Papio   Email Papio   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Still waiting.
You're not that busy M.T-Tomb, because you keep replying to other people.

Maybe you just asked a very difficult question that requires a lot of thought and a careful reply? [Biased]

--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page

Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Questions from Mudfrog are well crafted, in my experience.

He's a subtle operator, mark my words. Don't want to answer any of those on the hoof if you can avoid out... plenty of snares and traps for the unwart.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Papio:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Still waiting.
You're not that busy M.T-Tomb, because you keep replying to other people.

Maybe you just asked a very difficult question that requires a lot of thought and a careful reply? [Biased]
Many a true word said in jest. Seriously, I am busy and it is a good question.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Myrrh:
I can't think of any time the Orthodox Church built bonfires to obliterate those which disagreed with it.

You never read much Russian history then. Hundreds of thousands have been killed in the name of Christ by people claiming to be Orthodox Christians. Old Believers, Doukhobors, and of course Jews.
Possibly they did use bonfires, but I was thinking more of the systematic doctrine generated violence; the `burning of witches, the RCC two swords and Unam Sanctam, the Inquisition and so on where bonfires, forced conversion and the slaughter of heretics is mandated. The general development from Augustine of the just war doctrine, not that you won't hear Orthodox arguing for it now.

As for the Old Believers and anti-Semitism, well a lot of that did come in with ideas from the West, as did serfdom.., Initially I think Russia became more populated with Jews the worse things got for them in the West and then hate against them was generated in the East too. And as for now.., there's even more of it in Russia since secular Jews were also very much at the centre of the revolution and in control of the gulags and so on, and rather a lot of Orthodox Christians were killed at this time.

I read somewhere that more Jews join the Russian Orthodox Church than any other, like Alexander Men who was assassinated in 1990, and even now in Israel a great many of the recent immigrants from Russia are Russian Orthodox Jews. Orthodox have always honoured our beginnings, remembering that our God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as our liturgy shows. Which by the way is still basically that written by St James (the Just) when Bishop of the Church in Jerusalem and based on worship in the Temple, Jews feel very much at home in Russian temples - why shouldn't they, grafted onto their rootstock as we are. Some history on the liturgy http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLit.jsp?hostname=null

Icon of Abraham http://www.abcgallery.com/I/icons/icons43.html


Back to predestination v free will?

Myrrh

--------------------
and thanks for all the fish

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483

 - Posted      Profile for Myrrh         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
Myrrh asked:
quote:
Where does Scripture show we were incapable of doing good before Christ?
Here goes...
So all of Holy Scripture is contained in Paul?


quote:
quote:
[T]he sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. Romans 8.7-8
quote:
As for you (that's Christians), 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. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts (see Romans 8.8 above). Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive (i.e. God raised us, like Jesus raised Lazarus) with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this (i.e. faith) not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2.1.-9
quote:
[E]verything that does not come from faith is sin. Romans 14.23b
quote:
He who does what is sinful is of the devil (see Ephesians 2.1-2), because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God (see Romans 8.8 above); nor is anyone who does not love his brother. 1 John 3.10
Must I continue? I'm sure Gordon Cheng would enjoy reading this post but it might be a little dry for some!

So, if Paul acknowledges that those who do good are of God and those who do evil are of the devil, then how can you say that we are in total depravity since Adam and Eve when the OT is all about God teaching us to do good and not evil and the many examples of those who walked in righteousness with God? If we were incapable of keeping the commandments before baptism in Christ, how did Zacharias and Elizabeth were without sin? "And they were both righteous before the face of God, walking in all the commandments and ordinacnes of the Lord blameless.

Maybe Paul couldn't and didn't, but it was possible.

The doctrine of total depravity, estranged from God, unable to do good is a lie. If you look around you most people Christian or not are good, or try to be. As Paul notes:

Romans 2:14-16 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain



14For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

16In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.


Whatever you think Paul is saying by sinful nature he doesn't mean Augustine's total depravity.

Myrrh

[ 21. September 2006, 22:19: Message edited by: Myrrh ]

--------------------
and thanks for all the fish

Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
I can just imagine you raping a 12-year old schoolgirl.

Just a friendly jibe there.

I'm not buying it.

Well if you want to take offence then so be it. I'd be sad if you did though.
Excellent way to absolve yourself of responsibility for what you say. I shall have to remember this.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I'm sorry Jamac, but that all reads like speculation. There are very few hard links. One could make similar links between almost any parable or statement Jesus made and the Jewish nation. It may be that some Jewish leaders are guilty of such "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit"... but I really don't see that the passage appears exclusive to them or that situation... any more than the millstones around necks can be made specific to the Jewish nation.

Well, you're free to have any opinion I suppose.

If you look at Jesus life in a thematic way, There is a huge crisis when he is accused of being demonised by the leadership. His demeanour and modus operandi completely changes afterwards. You have to use a 'Harmony' of the gospels such as that by AT Robertson to see it clearly. To deny such evidence or to say this is not a 'hard link' doesn't really mean much. In any kind of literary criticism you piece together the evidence. Take the time to do this with the synoptic Gospels and you see clearly that Jesus' quarrel was with the generation who rejected his claims. This did not, of course, preclude individuals doing the same thing. However, the diatribe against those who see God's messenger as Satanically inspired has clear implications for the whole nation. The judgement Jesus pronounces is confirmed historically by the destruction of the temple and the city 40 years later. What sort of evidence would convince you MDJ?

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Originally posted by Myrrh:

quote:
Possibly they did use bonfires, but I was thinking more of the systematic doctrine generated violence; the `burning of witches, the RCC two swords and Unam Sanctam, the Inquisition and so on where bonfires, forced conversion and the slaughter of heretics is mandated. The general development from Augustine of the just war doctrine, not that you won't hear Orthodox arguing for it now.

As for the Old Believers and anti-Semitism, well a lot of that did come in with ideas from the West, as did serfdom...

The forced conversion of unbelievers pre-dates Augustine. There was this little thing called the Edict of Theodosius in the year 380, enthusiastically cheered on by the Orthodox Bishops. Between the death of Constantine and the rise of the Dutch Republic there are virtually no examples of Christian polities which tolerated unbelievers. East or West. Which leads me to suspect that Augustine may not be solely to blame for this.

The same applies to anti-Semitism which can be found in spades in the writings of St. John Chrysostom. Who predates Augustine and appears not to have been got at by the nasty Latins. As to the argument that a backward, despotic and agrarian state needed the influence of the west to introduce serfdom, well that's just fatuous.

Does it ever occur to you Myrrh that there may be evils in the world which are not attributable to the ever fertile pen of St. Augustine?

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamac:
Take the time to do this with the synoptic Gospels and you see clearly that Jesus' quarrel was with the generation who rejected his claims....... However, the diatribe against those who see God's messenger as Satanically inspired has clear implications for the whole nation.....What sort of evidence would convince you MDJ?

I'd agree with the argument you develop - I think one can describe Christ as being in conflict with the religious leadership of the Jewish nation, and say many of his statements in that light.

But there are many levels on which to understand the gospels... there are few statements that can only be read in one way, and I don't feel so comfortable making the leap to the stark statement "Blasphemy against Holy Spirit = a national sin". I could see an argument developed that the context is the pharasees rejection of him... their position as leaders... this offering an example of what is meant.... it's just the starkness and absolute certainty of the original statement I balked at.

I'm also not altogether comfortable with the idea of levelling particular accusations of national sin against the Jewish nation - and citing lack of conversion as evidence - since I think the gospel has more broad implications than that, there are many religious bodies and nations with low conversion rates... and much wickedness has been justified from such arguments in the church before.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Does it ever occur to you Myrrh that there may be evils in the world which are not attributable to the ever fertile pen of St. Augustine?

I'd previously understood that St. Augustine was almost unknown in the East... that the polution of Christian doctrine from his mouth was the undoing of the West... but now we find that Just war and anti-semitism have leached across from his pen/the West... he must have had considerable influence after all.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682

 - Posted      Profile for GreyFace   Email GreyFace   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Myrrh:
And the common belief is that we're born inherently sinful unable to do good or turn to God? Have any of these questioned that doctrine?

Sorry about the long delay in replying to these but I wanted to get things straight in my head rather than mislead you.

One of the features of modern Anglicanism is that there are core beliefs and there are areas of belief which are up for grabs - much as there are in Orthodoxy, but in the Anglican churches the range of adiaphora or theologumena is much, much wider.

I think it's fair to say that any doctrine has been questioned considerably by Anglicans, because we don't believe the Church of England or any other Anglican Church to be in sole possession of the truth in matters of faith or morals - though many believe that might apply to the whole Catholic Church which includes at the very least Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

quote:
Originally posted by Myrrh:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I'd be surprised if many Anglicans are conscious Calvinists.

This one certainly isn't, conscious or unconscious.
Do you agree with Augustine that without baptism we're in a sinful nature unable to do good?
No. However, it's not that simple - because I agree with the common perceptions of Augustine against Pelagius (I've not actually read Pelagius and I'm reading Augustine in more detail than I have in the past) that we are born in such a state of being that living a sinless life and thus being righteous by deed is practically impossible. A good deed is a good deed, an evil deed is an evil deed whoever does it.

Now, Original Sin, total depravity and baptism. Do I believe in them? Yes, but what I believe is not what you're attacking.

I believe Original Sin is the effect on us and on the society in which we live of the sins of our ancestors, that makes it practically impossible for us to live a sinless life.

I believe that no person can turn to God for help without his grace - but in some ways this is a useless doctrine on the Calvinist question because I believe he offers this grace to all.

I believe in baptism we mystically die with Christ and become part of his Body, the Church and from then on our regeneration proceeds, we work out our salvation in fear etc... because it is God etc, and that the Body of Christ acts as a priesthood to the rest of humanity, but that does not mean that God is not active in the lives of the unbaptised nor that they cannot do good. How could this be? Firstly, surely presenting oneself for baptism is good. Secondly, God can do what he likes.

I doubt very much whether I would be denounced as a heretic for any of these beliefs and in my experience they're fairly widespread. I would not identify them as the core of Anglicanism, either though, so other Anglicans might legitimately argue with me about them.

quote:
OK, I think I'm floundering here - are Anglo-Catholics some sort of liberals and not, as I'm imagining them, those looking to Rome because of recent changes in the Anglican Church?
The categories along which Anglicans align themselves are not as simple as you want them to be. There are Anglo-Catholic conservatives and liberals (on various issues that don't necessarily overlap) just as there are Evangelical conservatives and liberals and so on. The recent changes might be focussing a particular section of Anglo-Catholicism but it's been around for centuries, not a couple of years.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792

 - Posted      Profile for CrookedCucumber     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
I can just imagine you all, bearded and zealous, ecstatically capering around a well built bonfire...

I've thought very hard about this and I've decided that, on balance and taking all things into account, I wouldn't actually torch calvinists.

Cuff round the ear, yes; buning, no.

Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ...  14  15  16 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools