| ← Previous · 2007·07·30··08:20:28 · Next → |
| 5 Comments |
| “The Grace of Repentance” |
“. . . let us give up vain and fruitless cares, and approach to the glorious and venerable rule of our holy calling. Let us attend to what is good, pleasing, and acceptable in the sight of Him who formed us. Let us look steadfastly to the blood of Christ, and see how precious that blood is to God, which having been shed for our salvation, has set the grace of repentance before the whole world. Let us turn to every age that has passed , and learn that, from generation to generation, the Lord has granted a place of repentance to all such as would be converted unto Him.”
—The First Epistle of Clement, Chapter VII
5 Comments:
donsands
Which comes first, the grace, or the repentance? That is the argument for the last 2000 years.
Some say there's a neutral ground, where God brings us with His grace, and then we either repent and believe, or we don't. Neutral ground? I just don't see it.
Excellent quote BTW.
David
I don't think it's been argued for quite 2000 years. Clement, disciple of Paul, apparently believed it was grace.
donsands
I accept this fact as true. Basically, because I'm not the history student, though I wish I were.
But Paul surely did have to argue this with the believers at Galatia, I would think.
At least it seems to be the underlying issue, when the Church argues faith and works. I guess I could be wrong.
Was the Church basically "Reformed" up until James Arminius?
Like I stated, I'm not really the history student. Though I love to learn about the history of the Church, and am convinced that it is essential for the Body of Christ to know, and be taught, the history of the Church.
David
I'm no great student of history, either. As I understand it, though, the majority of the true church (obviously ruling out the apostate Roman Catholic "church," which was Arminian before Arminius) has been Reformed through history, even after Arminius. The Church did reject his teaching.
It was not until Wesley's day that Arminianism really gained ground. And that's what I mean when I say "I don't think it's been argued for quite 2000 years." It probably has, but not against a large contingent of synergists such as we see today. The true church, especially following the Reformation, has simply understood Reformed Theology to be Biblical Theology.
Even Lutheranism--the true, Bible-believing Lutheran church, that is--is basically Reformed, though they deny it vehemently.
Of course, there have been minority groups such as the Anabaptists who weren't Reformed, but they were the minority.
As I said, I'm no expert on Church History, but that's my take on it. But don't take my word for it just because you don't know better! Get some good history books. The Phillip Schaff set is probably the best place to start.
donsands
"It was not until Wesley's day that Arminianism really gained ground."
That makes sense.
Phillip Schaff. I check him out. Thanks.
Comments on this post are closed. If you have a question or comment concerning this post, feel free to email us.