|
chad_toney
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: Chad
Country: United States
State: Missouri
Metro: Kansas City
Gender: Male
Interests: I enjoy media quite a bit. In my free time I am either reading a book, listening to music, or watching a movie. I really like downhill skiing. I've been to the Rockies about 4 times and love it. I'm always thinking about when my next ski trip will be. I play guitar, write songs, and sing some.
Expertise: Guitar, computers (some).
Occupation: Computer related
Industry: Banking/Finance
Message: message me
Website: visit my website
AIM:  dustyroadie77
Member Since:
6/10/2005
|
|
| The good folks at The Catholic Channel and the Seize the Day program invited me to tell my conversion story live on the radio. It was a great time and the host, Gus LLoyd, was very professional.
I'm obviously not a pro at this, but if you're interested in listening the mp3 can be downloaded here. | | |
|
President of ETS Popes!
Pro: http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2007/05/dr_francis_beck.html
Dr.
Francis Beckwith, the president of the Evangelical Theological Society,
as (sic) become Catholic. Dr. Beckwith was raised Catholic but became
an Evangelical Protestant in youth. After a review of Catholic theology
and its basis, however, he has been reconciled with the Church.
. . .
Con: http://www.aomin.org/index.php?itemid=1961
. . .
And
surely, anyone who has gazed in awe at the grandeur of the finished
work of Christ in the light of the eternal decree of a holy and just
God, who can then "trade that in" for the endless treadmill of Rome's
sacramental system, the unfinished work of the Mass, and the specter of
satispassio in purgatory, is one far beyond my comprehension and
understanding. I truly pray for Dr. Beckwith's restoration, but more
so, I pray God will once again cause His people to recognize the
centrality of the truths of the gospel so that others may not fall into
the same temptations to trade in the reality of peace with God for the
empty facade of Roman piety. | | |
| Paleocrat's recent post encouraged me to put this out there again. It was originally posted on Chad Is Not Enough.
Question for Calvinists:
Do
you believe in a Total Depravity so complete that a reprobate could be
deceived into thinking, even up to his last breath, that he was regenerate, had true faith, displayed a fruitful life, received God's
loving discipline, and was of the Elect?
Some of my comments on the previous post:
As a calvinist I certainly would have thought this to be possible. In
fact, due to the inherent deceptiveness of the human heart, this would
only be expected of any reprobate who was a part of the faith
community. After all, if you are not part of the elect but you happen
to be a church going man, your proud and arrogant heart will almost
certainly tell you that you're doing fine and you're part of God's
chosen people. This is, in fact, in the more right thinking protestant
communities I've been a part of, one of the sins most preached against.
In my primary experience with Calvinism, which was actually as a
Reformed Baptist, I would have given a simple yes to this question.
This is a primary motivation for the morbid introspectionism that is
promoted in some Reformed Baptist circles. The Elect can speak of
assurance, but in practice, have no real assurance of any favourable
relationship with God, because of the possibility that they have only
elaborately deceived themselves with their Elect-like life.
In my secondary experience with Calvinism, which was in the CREC brand
of something-like-Presbyterianism, I would have given a simple no to
this question. I would have said that any man properly baptized has his
inherited depravity stripped from him, and if he proceeds to believe
himself (up to his last breath) regenerate with true faith, a fruitful
life, and the reception of God's loving discipline, then he truly is
"of the Elect" and will very, very likely be in Heaven. I would have
said that no reprobrate could be so deceived without actually failing
to be reprobate.
There is often a great deal of misunderstanding on this subject and I
have found myself defending (to a degree) Calvinists on a few occasions
though I now reject Calvin's teaching based on what the Church teaches.
Even when I was a Calvinist though, I had a haunting fear of this
myself. Am I just deceiving myself? Do I merely think I'm saved but
really I'm not? And bottom line on this subject for all who are so
confident in their own beliefs on justification: you won't be debating
doctrine with God on judgement day so let each man "approach his own
salvation with fear and trembling".
Chad, this is interesting because I recently asked somebody what the
basis of his assurance was. He was saying that Catholics have no
assurance whatsoever and this is false. We do not have infallible, eternal assurance but we can have assurance that we are currently
in a state of grace. This is what I John V speaks of. Calvinists
frequently point to this as their proof text, but forget about the
important distinction that the Elder makes in verse 16: that of venial
and mortal sin. This is the basis of a Catholic's assurance - not being
in the state of mortal sin.
The Calvinist has no such paradigm in his model of assurance, so
infallible assurance is impossible at worst, and merely subjective at
best. My friend even admitted to me during the conversation that
Catholics don't like the Protestant assurance because it's not
objective.
On another occasion, I asked another Calvinist the same question and
was met with a very honest, "I have no idea," when I asked them how
they can know that they are saved when they could just be deceiving
themselves. This is a huge point, and one that cannot be easily
overlooked.
I've been thinking about this as a while, and after reading some of the
replies here, I realized that while I was a Calvinist, I was a soft one.
I would have probably answered that this would not be possible because
the person would fall away before their last breath or come to true
faith. Total depravity means that peopel want nothing to do with
Christ, so why would they believe they were one of the elect?
At the same time, there was always that fear that I was not really
elect and that I may fall away. (Aside: Some would say I have fallen
away by becoming Catholic.) This seems incompatable with my first
response, but when I was a Calvinist, I believed that God would not
allow someone to be decieved. If they truly belived they were saved and
acted as if they were saved, they probably were in fact, saved.
Jonathan Edwards's book The Religious Affections comes to
mind. In this book, Edwards argues that you know the state of someone's
salvation by their fruit, or their good works. It's interesting that
the Puritans were really concerned about knowing if a person was really
saved, and this concern is probably connected with the question you are
asking. It's a question that Calvinists must wrestle with.
| | |
| 
Unfortunately another godly, scriptural giant of biblical truth kowtows to Romanism.
Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, known for his impeccable Togetherness for the Gospel with such stalwarts as Dr. John Macarthur has embraced a vile form of Roman "ecumenism".
He's
been caught promoting a book written by a Roman Catholic woman and
making positive comments about Pope John Paul II and his Theology of
the Body. Why we need such a focus on bodies, I'll never know (John
4:24). He also allowed a Roman "Seminarian" into his once-pure radio
studio.
See his fall from Truth here and here. | | |
|  Someone on a Catholic forum once asked:
Why is that Ex-Catholics have a complete anger towards the Catholic Church, while Catholic Converts from Evangelical Churches embrace their former faith and are thankful for those Churches they use to attend? I answered:
Ex-Catholics generally feel they were denied or not taught the central truths of the Gospel itself.
Ex-Protestants generally feel they are now completed Christians -- that they were taught many of the basics back in their Protestant communities, but have now united to the fullness of faith of the Church.
Those generalities given, I have to say that as a convert to Catholicism myself from an evangelical background, I have plenty of moments where I'm angry about what I didn't receive.
- Sure, I was taught the Bible -- but I was mostly taught proof-texts, strung together as arguments for a largely anti-historical, anti-sacramental, extremely individualistic American "gospel".
- Yeah, I was taught to love Jesus -- as interpreted by Paul as interpreted by Charles Ryrie.
- My father has spent most of his adult life going through the trials of starting and maintaining his own New Testament Church according to his and few of his friends' interpretation of that Testament.
- I was never directed to the Church Fathers for counsel.
- I was taught embarrassing and kooky evangelistic techniques (see Jesus Camp).
- I was taught that Young Earth Creationism was a non-negotiable "essential" to Christianity.
- Penal substitution and imputational Justification as a one-time event based on a single act of faith alone was the constant refrain. These and other concepts are hard to unlearn.
- Etc. I could go on all day.
But I try not to be angry, and to see the good in what I was given. There have been many converts previous to me that have set a good example in this area. | | |
|
