Comments on: The Trinity, Creation, and Covenantal Condescension: The Deeper Protestant Conception

By: Vince Lam

Vince Lam — Mon, 05 Nov 2018 20:06:19 +0000

Hi Brandon,

According to the Roman Catholic conception, man is NOT ordered naturally to see God. The Protestant conception of man IS ordered naturally to see God. Calvin is aware of the argumentative evasions and inconsistencies of the Papists but nevertheless obliges in order to refute them.

This is from Dr. Tipton’s notes:

“The donum superadditum is (a) an ontological supplement to enable man through cooperation with infused grace to ascend the hierarchy of being and participate in the divine nature and (b) an ethical supplement to address inherent conflict in man that would prohibit such cooperation. The ethical problem in man a function of his finitude–his under-proportioned/participated creaturely essence. Man is not ordered to God by nature nor is he inclined to God by nature. 1. Hence, a covenant is not possible on RC premises.”

By: Timothy Joseph

Timothy Joseph — Mon, 05 Nov 2018 14:29:58 +0000

Talk about speculative theology, reading what God intended and what might have happened if Adam had not sinned into the reality of the fall, is it in it’s most developed form. This is what Calvin had in mind when he warned against going beyond the plain reading of scripture.
We know Adam fell, we know Jesus, the second Adam, did not. We know Jesus’ perfect obedience was transferred to us, thus one day we will see God face to face, here on the New Earth which is also the new heaven, since God will dwell here! This is the actual Deeper Protestant Conception; that the Creator of the universe sent His One, Unique Son to redeem us and reconcile us to Him, while we were yet sinners. This reconciliation includes us being glorified and seeing Him as He is!

By: Brandon Adams

Brandon Adams — Thu, 25 Oct 2018 02:39:55 +0000

Dr. Tipton said “The logic of a covenant cannot be found in Roman Catholic theology.” I would appreciate further nuance and clarification on that statement. For example, commenting on Galatians 3:17, Calvin said

Paul took into account what was certainly true, that, except by a covenant with God, no reward is due to works. Admitting, then, that the law justifies, yet before the law men could not merit salvation by works, because there was no covenant. All that I am now affirming is granted by the scholastic theologians: for they maintain that works are meritorious of salvation, not by their intrinsic worth, but by the acceptance of God, (to use their own phrase,) and on the ground of a covenant. Consequently, where no divine covenant, no declaration of acceptance is found, — no works will be available for justification: so that Paul’s argument is perfectly conclusive.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom41.iii.v.iv.html

By: CM

CM — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 20:13:36 +0000

BTW, an inherent defect in Adam’s creation in the image of God is just what woke, queer theology is looking for for validation. I understand from another podcast that there was a breakout session at the Revoice conference that had to do with celbrating and speculating about how specifically gay cultural achievements etc., will transfer into the new creation. refereced also here: https://truthxchange.com/2018/08/revoice-sliding-into-heresy/

By: CM

CM — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:32:00 +0000

Excellent! Thanks for the notes!