About Me

My photo
I am a born-again Christian, who is Reformed, but also charismatic, spiritually speaking. (I do not speak in tongues, but I believe glossalalia is a bona fide gift not given to all, and not as great as prophecy, for example.) I have several years of college education but only completed a two-year degree. I was raised Lutheran and confirmed, but I didn't "find Christ" until I was in the Army and responded to a Billy Graham crusade in 1973. I was mentored or discipled by the Navigators in the army and upon discharge joined several evangelical, Bible-teaching churches. I was baptized as an infant, but believe in believer baptism, of which I was a partaker after my conversion experience. I believe in the "5 Onlys" of the reformation: sola fide (faith alone); sola Scriptura (Scripture alone); soli Christo (Christ alone), sola gratia (grace alone), and soli Deo gloria (to God alone be the glory). I affirm TULIP as defended in the Reformation.. I affirm most of The Westminster Confession of Faith, especially pertaining to Providence.
Showing posts with label romanism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label romanism. Show all posts

Saturday, August 27, 2016

The Romanist Dogma Of Free Will

Meditate on the following (emphasis added):

"So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy" (Romans 9:16, NKJV). 

 [W]ho were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God [we don't will ourselves saved]"  (John 1:13, NKJV).

"For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but to suffer for His sake"  (Philippians 1:29, NKJV). 

"... And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed"  (Acts 13:48, NKJV). 

 "... [But] the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded [hardened]"  (Romans 11:7, NKJV, emphasis added).

Luther was an Augustinian monk, and Augustine said that we are "free but not freed." We maintain our power to make choices as humans, but we have lost our liberty--we are slaves to sin, and, as he said, we are unable not to sin (non posse non peccare)--a double negative.  It's like being in jail and having the freedom to play cards, but not to walk outside for recreation at will--there is a limit to freedom and it's not absolute.  We are slaves to sin and our sin nature. We are free to choose our own poison and are, what has been termed by theologians, voluntary slaves--we love our sin and have no natural inclination to seek God or to love Him and only a work of grace in our hearts changes it from a "heart of stone to a heart of flesh" (cf. Ezek. 36:26).

We are still free to act according to our desires, but they are the wrong desires.  As Ovid, the Roman poet of antiquity wrote:  "I see the better things and I approve them, but I follow the worst."  The law of God is written on man's heart and he is culpable for breaking it (cf. Romans 2:15).  Romans 3:11 is God's pet peeve:  "[N]o one understands; no one seeks for God."

Most believers have wrongly assumed and appropriated the Catholic view of free will, that we have the capability to gain entree to God's grace or admittance into His presence by the merit of a positive attitude and willingness to cooperate with Him in our salvation, known as a pre-salvation work; however, "Salvation is of the Lord" [not of man alone nor of man and the Lord as in a cooperative or synergistic venture] (cf. Jonah 2:9). That statement of Jonah is the summation of Reformed theology and we must never think that we would've responded to the gospel call without God's wooing. We have lost the inclination to please God and do His will. We were elected unto faith, not because of it (known as the fallacious prescient view repudiated in Romans 8:30), because this would be grounds for merit. "No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draw him" (cf. John 6:44).

In today's humanist worldview man is exalted and seen as having the free will to do as he wishes or wants to.  Martin Luther told Erasmus in his tome, The Bondage of the Will, that "free will" was too grandiose a term to ascribe to our power of choice or to make decisions from our depraved, fallen volition.  You must define terms when you speak of free will, because we do have the power to disobey God and to choose our desserts, but we cannot believe in Christ apart from God's grace and work in our heart.

Adam and Eve had free will and blew it: they had the power to sin and the power not to sin, while a fallen man can only sin and is unable not to sin. Adam made the choice for us to disobey God in our place, and we are in Adam and held accountable for his failure and this is known commonly as original sin--this inherited virus which is our birthright as humans--we have remained human, but are no longer good, but maintain solidarity in Adam and we share his predicament he had the fall--i.e., the natural inclination to good has been forfeited.

In defining total depravity, one must take into consideration that the mind is corrupt and faulty, the emotions are perverted and easily swayed by evil and corrupted, and the will also is defiant and disobedient to God and this means our whole nature--intellect, emotions or heart, and will or volition--is depraved and there is nothing meritorious or righteous in us to be worthy of salvation--"... And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags" (Isaiah 64:6, NKJV) and "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?  Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil" (Jeremiah 13:23, ESV).

God is able (He's omnipotent and you cannot limit God) to make the unwilling, willing according to Scripture:  He works irresistible or efficacious grace in our hearts according to His will ("For it is God who works in you, both to do and to will of his good pleasure," cf. Phil. 2:13). God never makes us do anything we don't want to do (that is coercion or determinism when we don't have input), and there is no outside force working on us like we're puppets on a string or automatons.  We all act according to our nature, and God is our Maker and preordained and predetermined our nature, whether melancholy, choleric, or sanguine, for example.

If you think about it, the will have very little input into a decision compared to other uncontrollable factors like circumstances, DNA, and the environment (the old nature vs. nurture debate).  It is a fallacy to assume we need free will to be saved, we need wills made free!  "If the Son shall set you free, you shall be free indeed"  (cf. John 8:36).  We are not "born free" as some postulate, but born into a state of slavery to our sin nature. Left to ourselves, we would not choose Christ, as Pascal said:  "I would not have searched for Thee, if Thou hadst not found me."

Our freedom is a curse because we choose the evil and the wrong course and God must intervene and change our heart, by taking the initiative and making the first move of grace.  We are free to act as we choose according to our nature, just like a dove naturally eats seeds and a raven goes for the carrion.  Our will is free in that we act voluntarily, and not by compulsion.  We're voluntary slaves!   God remains sovereign in spite of our free will and we cannot thwart His decrees or will and upset His plan--our freedom doesn't restrict God's sovereignty:  "...Who can resist His will?" (Cf. Romans 9:19).

To think that we can act independently of God's will and disturb His plan is blasphemous and exalts man and dethrones God--this is the agenda of Secular Humanism, which believes man is the measure of all things and is the starting point of our understanding of reality, and not God the source of all truth ("In the beginning God...").

St. Augustine of Hippo said, "We are free but not free."  This isn't a clever play on words but saying that we do as we choose but have lost our liberty.  It's like being in jail and having the freedom to do anything according to the rules.  Our natures are corrupt and we act according to our natures that need regeneration by God to a new birth of faith and repentance.  We are free but in our depravity we choose evil!  Apart from God's intervention and grace no one would get saved and believe. 

In summation, God never coerces us to do anything we don't want to do--that's determinism, not destiny.  We have input unlike the blind fate of Muslim kismet.  However, God is able to make the unwilling willing and to change our hearts and minds to do His will for He is stronger and can influence us for the good--it's when He withdraws His grace that we turn evil.  We must confess as did Jeremiah in Jer. 20:7, NKJV, "...You are stronger than I, and have prevailed (cf. Isa. 63:17; Phil. 2:13).  It is said that He compels us to come in (literal translation of the Greek elko or woo).    Soli Deo Gloria!

Thursday, February 25, 2016

Critique Of The Catholic Tradition..

Back in 1517 the professor and Augustinian monk Martin Luther said in effect, "I dissent, I disagree, I protest" to the church of Rome and nailed the famous 95 Theses on the door of the Castle Church All Souls in Wittenberg, Saxony, on Halloween night.  Since then there have been irreconcilable differences between the faiths and this started the Reformation, which brought about the Counter-Reformation of the Catholics at the Council of Trent, 1545-63.  In effect, they condemned the Protestants and anyone who believed in their formula of salvation dogma (church accepted doctrine) which is salvation by faith alone (they pronounced them "anathema" or cursed). Justification by faith alone became the battle cry of the Reformation.  Note that the Catholics condemn Protestants, and not the reverse as they said in Vatican Council II that one cannot be saved apart from the Church or that "it is necessary for salvation." What Protestants rejected was that Roman Catholicism is mainly a religion because it adds merit to grace and works to faith and doesn't rely solely upon Christ alone in faith, but faith also in the Church or Pope.  Catholicism is primarily a tradition that adherents follow without questioning authority.

The point of disagreement lies not in the deity of Christ or the infallibility of Scripture but in the doctrine of soteriology or of the study of salvation.  We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, and the authority is in Scripture alone.  Catholics take issue at all these points:  They add merit to grace; works to faith; faith in the Church or Pope to Christ; and tradition and the Church to Scripture. Catholics believe that the instrumental means of salvation are the sacraments and as the Church administers them in baptism Holy Communion.  Protestants believe the instrumental means is faith and this is a gift of God so that we cannot boast.  Protestants see Christ as our Mediator (see 1 Tim. 2:5) while Catholics have declared Mary as Co-Redeemer or and Co-Mediator or Mediatrix. Protestants see all believers as priests unto God and we don't need a priesthood.  All believers have the authority to interpret Scripture, however, the responsibility and obligation to do it correctly, and not just the priest, for no prophecy of Scripture is of a "private interpretation" according to  2 Pet. 1:20.

Protestants have nothing against tradition as long as it complies with Scripture or doesn't contradict it. For example, where Catholics have unbiblical traditions or are out of sync or harmony with Scripture are traditions such as:  Believing the Church is built on Peter, the first Pope; there is a purgatory to purge of sin; prayers can be said to Mary and the dead saints (invocation of saints); images are made to kneel and pray before; the mass and sacraments are needed for salvation; salvation is through the Roman Catholic Church; in communion, the elements become the actual body and blood of Christ (transubstantiation); penance is for the restoration of fellowship; the notion that indulgences are made for the dead in purgatory; veneration and worship of Mary; holy water; canonization of saints; the celibacy of priests; and the repetition of the Rosary.  None of these are based on Scripture and in fact contradict sound doctrine.

Other traditions include the addition of nuns, monks, monasteries, convents, Lent, Ash Wednesday, Holy Week, All Saints Day, declaring the Pope to be the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church (per Col. 1:18 Jesus is Head), the infallibility of the Pope, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the immaculate conception of Mary, the assumption of Mary, the crowning of Mary as Queen of Heaven and Mother of God. Basically, the problem lies in the fact that they attribute tradition as having equal authority as Scripture.  Whereas, Jesus rebuked the Pharisees:  "... [T]heir teachings are but rules taught by men."

Vatican II said in the 1960's on the Ecumenism:  "For it is through the Catholic Church alone, which is the all-embracing means of salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained."


This is where contention arose:  Their spirit of exclusion and condemnation which is not based on Scriptural support but only edict and tradition of Rome [declared at the Council of Trent] and the Papists.  Read the blasphemy of Pope Pius the Ninth, the first "infallible" Pope in 1870:  "I alone, despite my unworthiness, am the successor to the apostles and Vicar to Christ.  I alone have the mission to guide and direct the ship of Peter.  I am the Way, the Truth and the Life.  They who are with me are with the Church.  They who are not with me are out of the Church."   The Bible says that Christ is the Rock and there is one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus (cf. 1 Tim. 2:5). Paul says in 1 Cor. 10:4 that "that Rock" was Christ.  They see Peter as the "rock" but Christ only called him "Petros" or rock in Greek, and the truth he expressed as "Petra" or foundation rock" in Greek that would be the Rock of His church.  This church position is highly sectarian (Paul condemns sectarianism in 1 Cor. 1) and is exclusive.

Their veneration of the Virgin Mary as the tradition was declared at the Vatican in 1994 as follows:  "The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.  The church rightly honors the Blessed Virgin with special devotion.  ... The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an 'epitome of the whole gospel,' express this devotion to the Virgin Mary."  [Mat. 1:25 says that Joseph had "no union" with Mary until "she gave birth" implying losing her virginity, while Mark 6 and Mat. 13 list Jesus' brothers.] Praying to Mary contravenes the example of the Apostles and seeing her as sinless contradicts her addressing God as her Savior in the Magnificat. The obeisance to Mary was exemplified by Pope John Paul II in May of 1991 when he went to Fatima in Portugal and placed a crown of diamonds on a statue of Mary for saving his life from an assassination attempt. This is no less than the so-called hyper-elevation of Mary and seeing her as without sin through the immaculate conception and crowned as Queen of Heaven.  Pope Leo the Twelfth said, "No one can approach Christ except through the Mother."  He also said, "... [Nothing] according to the will of God comes to us except through Mary."  None of these dogmas are warranted in Scripture and undermine the gospel and the Incarnation.

In short, Rome has declared that there is no higher authority than the Pope, who they see as the direct successor of Peter, who they say was the first Pope [But Paul put him in his place, even accusing him of hypocrisy] and is head of the Church, and in order to be saved one must be subject to his authority, making Protestants heretics.  Relying on Mat. 16:18-19 they say Peter was given "the keys" but Jesus makes it clear in John 20:23 that the right to forgive was given to all the apostles and this was clearly delineated in Scripture--Acts 10:43 says all who believe in Jesus are forgiven!  Roman Catholics always refer to Mat. 16:18-19.  Catholics say Jesus was just talking to Peter when He gave authority, but Peter is the subset of the larger band of disciples and this is reading into the Scripture or eisegesis and to justify their understanding of the church and of the legitimacy of a Pope,  they are taking the verse out of context--the full analogy of Scripture, that is; for Scripture is its own interpreter (see John 20:23) and it never contradicts itself. It isn't wrong to call someone a heretic if you can prove it by Scripture, but they just declare it by church dogma and tradition and cannot base it on any biblical authority. Protestants believe the Bible is sufficient to rule our faith and we don't need tradition, which is acceptable only as it is concordant with Scripture and not in conflict with biblical dogma.  In sum, Roman Catholics believe there is no higher authority than the Pope and it is necessary to be subject to him for salvation [decreed by Pope Boniface the Eighth, in his Bull of 1302].  The reason they accept this is tradition and they believe in tradition as equal validity as the Bible.  Everyone must ultimately ask himself:  What is your rule of faith?

In the final analysis, if you find yourself compromising your faith or not believing sound doctrine is important and worth sticking to, or not sticking to your guns, you are on the way to a falling away. You must be in the know or be privy to what this religion stands for so you will be prepared when God opens the door for you to testify of the truth--He who is of the truth will listen. The adage it doesn't matter what you believe as long as you are sincere is fallacious.  Paul spoke of Israel as having a "zeal for God, but not according to knowledge" (cf. Rom. 10:2, ESV).   We do not judge Catholic counterparts, but we must be willing to take a stand for the truth when the time is right.

As a quick litmus test of orthodoxy, ask a Catholic friend if he believes in free will.  Augustine said we did with reservations:  We have a free will, but we are not freed.  We are set free upon salvation, not born free--i.e., we don't have liberty, but are voluntary slaves of sin.   Rome has condemned anyone who doesn't affirm the Catholic doctrine of absolute free will--they believe the will is not affected by the fall of Adam, in other words, but remains in a neutral position freely able to choose Christ apart from God's intervention and aid.  Jesus said, "Apart from me you can do nothing" (cf. John 15:5).  If left to ourselves, none of us would've chosen Christ!

Free will introduces merit and makes some worthy of salvation by their free choice.  A pertinent verse is Romans 9:19 which says, "You will say to me then, 'Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?'"  Another is John 1:13 which says we are not saved by the will of man but of God! If you came to Christ on your own, you probably left Him on your own!  Jesus plainly said, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him"  (John 6:44, ESV).  And:  "... [T]his is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father"  (John 6:65, ESV).  This is commonly called the "wooing" or drawing ministry of the Holy Spirit who empowers us unto faith by quickening our spirit and opening our eyes.  We didn't choose our nature and we are only clay in the Potter's hands, but we are free to act according to our God-given nature, disposition, or temperament.  Who said we need free will to be saved--we need our wills made free!  "For it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure"  (Phil. 2:13, ESV).

The Bible says not to be unequally yoked, and this means you must have a mutual respect and understanding in your faiths, but not necessarily to be of the same denomination.  You must be able to pray together if you want to stay together.  If there is one thing that'll change your theology in a hurry it's falling in love!  Caveat:  The husband is in the role of the spiritual head of the family and must not be derelict or remiss in his duties to take charge and lead.    Soli Deo Gloria!

Sunday, July 20, 2014

Roman Imprimatur

Most Christians are aware that Catholics are not allowed to read books unless they have the papal imprimatur or sanction of the pontiff. I'm pretty sure they can't write without approval either, it would seem. Now, as a Protestant, I can write a book on the Bible and publish it without getting a church's approval, though it might be unwise to have no one advise or review it. It would be a so-called "sin." When a preacher teaches he mention the caveat that the listeners shouldn't take his word for it but be "Bereans" and search things out for themselves in a noble manner. The teacher is indeed responsible to God but that doesn't deduct from the student's responsibility and he can't pass the buck and say he was just following the leader like they did in the People's Temple with Rev. Jim Jones committing suicide (by the way they found no Bibles at the campsite).

Families are encouraged to hold Bible studies with the father being the spiritual leader, and it is alright for brothers to get together and hold an "unauthorized" Bible study. What we mean by "authorized" is open to debate. I hold a Bible study that is announced in the church bulletin and one of the church members is acting as an "elder" is in charge of activities and spiritual leadership, et cetera. My old pastor thought it was great to have a Bible study and even thinks I should start one at the Vets Home. I think we are to encourage each other in the Lord's works and not offer positive feedback and bless each other and not criticize each other's ministries.

As it says in 1 Cor. 4:5: "Judge nothing before the time." That is why I refrain from judging para-church organizations such as the Navigators (having been greatly influenced and indebted to them while in the Army). They act outside of a church's authority but encourage you to attend your own local church and not be dependent on them--likewise, my Bible study is composed of people from different churches and I encourage them to assemble regularly so as not to overly influence them and take away their discernment. I am also under authority by being the member of a body of believers, and there would be no way to go off on a heretical tangent or off the deep end into apostasy without my friend Nick catching me in the act.

There comes a point when you have to step out in faith if you want to do anything for the Lord. In a sense I am a true Protestant: "I dissent, I disagree, I protest." Luther said to go against conscience is neither "right nor safe."  Soli Deo Gloria!