M
- Status
B
BRB1
Guest
The Assumption of Mary … based on tradition and believed by many ECF’s.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
As individuals, we all make assumptions in our daily lives that may be incorrect (I assume you mean incorrect assumptions?) As for the Church as a teaching authority, maybe you could say at the time of the Reformation, they assumed all the faithful were well-catechized, and maybe even a little today, since Vatican II, based on the poor quality of education on the matter. I think Pope Benedict is doing a good job advancing more clarity on the faith.
Doctrinally, however, the Church does not make assumptions at all, really. Many doctrines take years and years and centuries to develop. No assumptions are made off the bat, but time and universality are allowed to manifest.
J
Junebug999
Guest
I always assume that as well.
I also believe (NOT assume) that the Holy Spirit through Christ’s one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church will guide me in all truth!
Praise God! Also, did I tell you I will be baptized and come into full communion with Christ’s Church on Easter Vigil (not that I’m not shouting from the rooftops or anything), but THIS Protestant is finishing her journey home !!!
B
bradwill911
Guest
That is honestly a very difficult question. As a Catholic, I assume that Protestants believe that we are Christians, but often they do not. I assume that a Protestant would always be open to hear what the Catholic Church actually teaches, they often are not. I assume that my fellow Catholics are as passionately Catholic as I am, but often they are not. I often assume that Protestants assume they know what the Catholic Church teaches and often they do not.
I spent 15 years or so away from the Church, as a “Bible-thumping Protestant” and I assumed that just about everything the Catholic Church did was diabolically wrong. No amount of arguing would change my mind, because even if the CC was making sense, I assumed that I was being deceived. Needless to say, it’s good to be back home.
M
mmmcounts
Guest
I got another one; you run into them pretty frequently if you hang out here long enough.
Here’s one more assumption that many Catholics make:
To “fall from grace” is to commit a mortal sin and lose your salvation. Until you confess, of course.
Check out Galatians 5:4 if you want to see the only place in the Bible where any form of the word “fall” appears in the same verse as “grace.”
“You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.”
Here’s one more assumption that many Catholics make:
To “fall from grace” is to commit a mortal sin and lose your salvation. Until you confess, of course.
Check out Galatians 5:4 if you want to see the only place in the Bible where any form of the word “fall” appears in the same verse as “grace.”
“You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.”
P
PJM
Guest
My dear freind in Christ,
What you say is correct in so far as it goes. However you seem to lack an understanding of what Catholics means when we say “one has fallen from grace.”
You may wish to reread Jn.21:30.
1 Jn. 5: 13 I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life. 14 And this is the confidence which we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. 15 And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him. 16 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God * will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.
So John is clearly saying that there atr at least two TYPES of sin. Those that “are Mortal” and those which are NOT MORTAL!
Just what is a “Mortal sin”?
WEBSTERS defines “mortal” as:
1: causing or having caused death : fatal
2 a: subject to death b: possible , conceivable c: deadly 3
6: of, relating to, or connected with death
synonyms see deadly
The 1st. defination is the one we seek. "Causing or having caused death!"
“Mortal Sins” are so very serious by there NATURE that they seperate one from ones personal relationship with Christ! Mortal sin effectively “kill” ones relationship with Christ, thus depriving one of Gods GRACE.
One who has unConfessed, Unrepented Mortal sin, remains removed from Gods grace,
“Itell you, you are Peter, and on this rock * I will build my church, and the powers of death * shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
21* Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” 22* And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23* If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are
9* because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 **For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved
**.
So friend, we either take God at his word, or we join those who think that they know more, know better than their God. The bible passages are Gods words not mine. NOT CATHOLIC but truly UNIVERSAL!
Love and prayers,
D
Della
Guest
If Catholics believed we need to be justified by the Law your accusation might apply, but since we don’t, once again, all you’ve done is set up yet another straw man.
I know perfectly well you are trying to equate the Law of Moses with the doctrines and dogmas, disciplines and devotions of the Church but it doesn’t wash. We are not bound by laws which have been fulfilled in Christ. We are operating under Christ’s teachings and the authority of his own Church. You really have to stop assuming you know what Catholics believe, coming to us to accuse us of what we don’t believe, and then telling us when we explain we don’t believe what you think that we do believe it.:whacky: It’s counter productive for all of us–you most especially, dear friend in Christ.
P
PJM
Guest
Della,:tiphat:I know perfectly well you are trying to equate the Law of Moses with the doctrines and dogmas, disciplines and devotions of the Church but it doesn’t wash. We are not bound by laws which have been fulfilled in Christ. We are operating under Christ’s teachings and the authority of his own Church. You really have to stop assuming you know what Catholics believe, coming to us to accuse us of what we don’t believe, and then telling us when we explain we don’t believe what you think that we do believe it.:whacky: It’s counter productive for all of us–you most especially, dear friend in Christ.
Well done!
Truthful, concise and Charitable ,
It’s wonderful being an informed, practicing Catholic
THANK YOU:thumbsup:
M
mmmcounts
Guest
I looked at John 21, but it only has 25 verses. I realize this is probably a typo- I did this just a couple of days ago when I cited something in 1 Peter when I meant to do 2 Peter. If you can double-check this and re-route the order, I’d be happy to reread whatever you like. As of right now, though, I can’t figure out where you meant to direct me. As I said, Galatians 5:4 is the only result that shows up for me when searching for the words “fall” and “grace” together in the same verse. If you’ve found something else that talks about what it means to fall from grace- aside from the CCC- I’d be happy to take a look.
“Mortal” is certainly an interesting rendering of πρὸς θάνατον, which means “unto death.” The fact that someone made a translation that more easily conforms to the CCC does not mean that was the intent of the author- you’ve only shown the intent of the translator. In any case, the main questions to ask of this passage are whether or not a Christian can commit “sin that is unto death” and, no matter what the answer, what the nature of that sin is. At the risk of going well off-topic here, though, here’s a link. biblebb.com/files/j90-11-1.htm I think I’m done here.
“Mortal” is not a word that is used to describe sin in the Bible. Some translations (I haven’t figured out which ones yet) include that word in the place of a better translation of the Bible’s words, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. This link will take you to a wide variety of translations of this verse. bible.cc/1_john/5-16.htm None of them translate “sin unto death” as “mortal sin.” Did you get this from the older NAS translation? Shoot man, even the D-R says “sin unto death.” Where did you dig this one up? Oh, and just one more quick question: When a couple dozen translations- including the D-R- all translate a phrase as “sin unto death,” what do you expect me to think of a person who brings up a translation saying “mortal sin” and (I assume) just hopes I don’t notice the discrepancy and check on this? Were you really oblivious to the situation here? You were confident enough in the accuracy of this translation to build an entire doctrine of mortal vs. “not mortal” sins on it. Does it bother you that the Biblical foundation of this doctrine is gone now? I guessing “not really.” After all, you’re Roman Catholic. You don’t need a Biblical foundation in order to build doctrine. It’s nice, but totally optional.
A concept created by the Church of Rome which doesn’t appear in the Bible. Do you know the Greek word for “mortal?” That word does appear in the Bible, but never in the context of “mortal sin.”
The Greek word for “mortal” is θνητός, the lexical definition of which is “liable to death; mortal.” It appears in the following passages.
Romans 6:12- Let not then the sin reign in your mortal body, to obey it in its desires;
Μὴ οὖν βασιλευέτω ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐν τῷ θνητῷ ὑμῶν σώματι εἰς τὸ ὑπακούειν ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις αὐτοῦ
Romans 8:11- and if the Spirit of Him who did raise up Jesus out of the dead doth dwell in you, He who did raise up the Christ out of the dead shall quicken also your dying bodies, through His Spirit dwelling in you.
εἰ δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἐγείραντος τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ νεκρῶν οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν, ὁ ἐγείρας Χριστὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῳοποιήσει καὶ τὰ θνητὰ σώματα ὑμῶν διὰ τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος αὐτοῦ πνεύματος ἐν ὑμῖν.
1 Cor. 15:53- for it behoveth this corruptible to put on incorruption, and this mortal to put on immortality;
δεῖ γὰρ τὸ φθαρτὸν τοῦτο ἐνδύσασθαι ἀφθαρσίαν καὶ τὸ θνητὸν τοῦτο ἐνδύσασθαι ἀθανασίαν.
1 Cor. 15:54- and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, `The Death was swallowed up – to victory;
ὅταν δὲ τὸ φθαρτὸν τοῦτο ἐνδύσηται ἀφθαρσίαν καὶ τὸ θνητὸν τοῦτο ἐνδύσηται ἀθανασίαν, τότε γενήσεται ὁ λόγος ὁ γεγραμμένος, Κατεπόθη ὁ θάνατος εἰς νῖκος.
2 Cor. 4:11- for always are we who are living delivered up to death because of Jesus, that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our dying flesh,
ἀεὶ γὰρ ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες εἰς θάνατον παραδιδόμεθα διὰ Ἰησοῦν, ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ φανερωθῇ ἐν τῇ θνητῇ σαρκὶ ἡμῶν.
2 Cor. 5:4- for we also who are in the tabernacle do groan, being burdened, seeing we wish not to unclothe ourselves, but to clothe ourselves, that the mortal may be swallowed up of the life.
καὶ γὰρ οἱ ὄντες ἐν τῷ σκήνει στενάζομεν βαρούμενοι, ἐφ’ ᾧ οὐ θέλομεν ἐκδύσασθαι ἀλλ’ ἐπενδύσασθαι, ἵνα καταποθῇ τὸ θνητὸν ὑπὸ τῆς ζωῆς.
All the stuff in English is what’s found in Young’s Literal Translation.
At no point in the Bible does it talk about “mortal sin.” I suppose you could state the opposite of this fact and present it as one more assumption made by Catholics.
If you mean to equate the first option with conforming to what you believe, I’m going to have to point out a false dichotomy. If you will allow for the possibility that I can take God at his word but not agree with you, I can be OK with this.
So, let’s review what we’ve found so far: I was right when I said Catholics assume that a person who has “fallen from grace” has committed a mortal sin and been deprived of sanctifying grace. You haven’t addressed the only verse in the Bible that talks about what it means to fall from grace, so I guess you could be ignoring it.
We can add to this the assumption that “mortal sin” is something that appears in the Bible- in other words, that there is a verse that has some form of the adjective θνητός modifying some form of the noun ἁμαρτία. There are a couple of examples of verses that talk about “sin unto death” (ἁμαρτία πρὸς θάνατον), but there are zero examples of verses talking about “mortal sin.” The same goes for “venial sin,” but I think you knew that much.
This is fun. I’m glad someone started this thread. I’m coming across more Catholic assumptions even while you’re in the process of denying some of them. My main question at this point is whether or not you’re ever going to get around to talking about Galatians 5:4. I don’t expect that we’ll ever agree on what it means to fall from grace, but I hope you can at least come to an understanding as to how it happens. I mean, it says right there. It doesn’t say mortal sin causes you to fall from grace. It says those who are attempting to be justified by the law have fallen from grace. Despite this, most Catholics believe the Bible says something about “mortal sin” (it doesn’t) and that committing this kind of sin is the way a person falls from grace (it doesn’t say that, either). What it actually does say is found in Galatians 5:4.
Oh, and I’m not implying that Roman Catholics are trying to be justified by the law and that they’ve all fallen from grace. I’m just saying most Roman Catholics assume that the process of falling from grace is one of committing mortal sin. But that’s not how it works, and it’s not what the Bible says. Once again:
[SIGN]For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God’s grace.
κατηργήθητε ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε, τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε.[/SIGN]
Thanks for playing.
P
PJM
Guest
Dear friend in Christ, PLEASE review this and the following post. Lenght reqires this
P
PJM
Guest
From PJM
Part 2
Gal. 5: 4 “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.”
First allow me to share the Haddock Catholic Commentary response: (published in 1859)
“Ver. 4. If you think that justice cannot be obtained but under the law, you make a renunciation of the justice of Christ: his mediation becomes of no avail to you.”
Paul’s community were not only unbelieving, but this audience was also largely Jewish. So Paul, like any experienced teacher, begins where his audience is mentally and spiritually.
They could seemingly not get passed The Old Covenant, “Old laws,” and the fact that there was now a “New Covenant” (Heb. 8:13, and Lk. 22”22-23.) That now is a time when we are no longer under) the (OLD) law, but rather we are now under a period of GRACE. (Rom. 6: 14-15.)
So Paul is expressing the New Truth, that we are no longer bound by what was, rather, we are now bound by what is! By the Coming of Christ, by His Sacrifice, by the Church he began to direct and guide us unto Salvation as He Jesus intended.
“What is” refers to the Ten Commandments (not expanded into 600+ old laws), but also not simply the 10 categories of sin that they represent. Also included in “Love of Neighbor as self,” and Baptism. (Jn. 3:5, Mt. 19:17.)
Paul is stating that those who do not accept the New Covenant, do not accept God’s grace and the Merits earned by Jesus Himself. That these peoples (Rom.5:15-17, Rom.8:1-3) by personal choice, bring condemnation (unto death) for themselves.
Love and prayers,
If there are other assumptions I’d be happy to play along with your concerns
Pat
Part 2
I’m using the NSV version of the bible, but can use the “D-R” or any other Catholic bible version if you have a preference?
Gal. 5: 4 “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.”
First allow me to share the Haddock Catholic Commentary response: (published in 1859)
“Ver. 4. If you think that justice cannot be obtained but under the law, you make a renunciation of the justice of Christ: his mediation becomes of no avail to you.”
Paul’s community were not only unbelieving, but this audience was also largely Jewish. So Paul, like any experienced teacher, begins where his audience is mentally and spiritually.
They could seemingly not get passed The Old Covenant, “Old laws,” and the fact that there was now a “New Covenant” (Heb. 8:13, and Lk. 22”22-23.) That now is a time when we are no longer under) the (OLD) law, but rather we are now under a period of GRACE. (Rom. 6: 14-15.)
So Paul is expressing the New Truth, that we are no longer bound by what was, rather, we are now bound by what is! By the Coming of Christ, by His Sacrifice, by the Church he began to direct and guide us unto Salvation as He Jesus intended.
“What is” refers to the Ten Commandments (not expanded into 600+ old laws), but also not simply the 10 categories of sin that they represent. Also included in “Love of Neighbor as self,” and Baptism. (Jn. 3:5, Mt. 19:17.)
Paul is stating that those who do not accept the New Covenant, do not accept God’s grace and the Merits earned by Jesus Himself. That these peoples (Rom.5:15-17, Rom.8:1-3) by personal choice, bring condemnation (unto death) for themselves.
Love and prayers,
If there are other assumptions I’d be happy to play along with your concerns
Pat
M
mmmcounts
Guest
It took me a moment to figure out what the idea was, but I think I see it now. The only Biblical reference to the phrase “fall from grace” is in Galatians 5:4, but Jesus may have said something about that which isn’t recorded. Let me know it that’s the general idea. If so, do you have any reason to believe you know what Jesus may have said about this, and how did you come across it?
If you’re writing something in Greek, there are three words you write which mean “sin unto death.” (H)amartia is sin, pros is unto, and thanaton is death. There are many places in the Bible where certain grammatical structures and/or use of tense make something difficult to translate very precisely, and depending on what you end up with, the different results may have profound theological implications. For example, some of the things you look at are tense, mood, and voice. If a phrase is in the present active indicative, it is a fairly straightforward job of translation that is easily rendered in English. If, however, the tense is middle or middle/passive, that’s trickier because English doesn’t really have these tenses. We have to work with the grammatical differences of the languages and come up with the most precise translation possible. Likewise, if the mood is subjunctive, that connotes a “mood of probability.” A similar mood is the optative, which is the “mood of possibility.” Any translation of such words depends on the context and author’s intent (which is fuzzy sometimes) and may range along a couple dozen different types of meanings. I remember a fun (and kind of frustrating) Greek worksheet that gave us all the different uses and we had to come up with the right translation. There’s lots of things that can make translation tricky, but those are the really broad groups of factors.
Basically, the phrase “(h)amartia pros thanaton” is not a tricky one to translate. All of the words are, for all intents and purposes, unchanged from their lexical (that means “dictionary definition”) format. If you look up the definition of the word and put it in place of the Greek word, the grammar stuff- the tense, mood, and voice- does not force you to mess with it at all. Sin is a noun, unto is a preposition, and death is the object of the preposition. That is what’s written there, so that’s how you translate it. There are tons of examples of difficult translation jobs in the Bible, but this is not one of them. It’s a straightforward phrase at a 101 level using vocab that you’d learn in the first two weeks of taking Greek. That’s also why (almost) every translation has the same thing. The word for “mortal” does not appear in this verse. However, what you do see is the words for “sin,” “unto,” and then “death.”
Translation of this verse is the easy part. Interpretation is the hard part. It doesn’t always work that way, but for this verse, that’s how it goes.
I don’t use any one specific translation, but I generally use Young’s Literal Translation as something to check against. If necessary, I will also access any of the online Greek-English interlinear Bibles that allow me to see all the information about every word. The reason I mentioned the D-R is because it’s the Catholic translation which does the following: The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold Catholic tradition in the face of the Protestant Reformation which was heavily influencing England. As such, you can expect to find places where the text does not necessarily say what the Greek manuscript says. Especially in places where a Catholic and Protestant might disagree, both the text and the notes are crafted with these differences in mind. This changed a bit with the revisions of Richard Challoner, making the KJV the main base for the D-R instead of the Vulgate. Nevertheless, if a Catholic were going to quote a translation with a Catholic, er…tendency (and specifically an anti-Protestant one on very specific issues), the D-R is the most obvious choice- even if it’s not always the right one.
The way Protestants tend to view the D-R is about the same way either of us would view the New World Translation- which is put out by a little group called Watchtower. Yup, that would the the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The most obvious difference is in John 1, which in this translation reads “In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” Grammatically speaking, it technically is legal to translate this “a god.” That’s because the noun is anarthrous (meaning it has no article), and since indefinite articles (a, an) do not exist in Greek, they must be added in where appropriate. If you’re ever faced with a conversation on this with a JW at your door, it’s good to know that this translation is within the grammatical rules of the language, but the theology really sucks. These kinds of situations come up between Protestants and Catholics, too. There’s a pretty well-known list of “proof texts” that are used on both sides to judge whether or not a translation has a bias, but it’s probably good for you to know that the passage from 1 John is not on any such list. Protestants and Catholics translate it the same way because it’s pretty easy and straightforward.
Paul’s community were not only unbelieving, but this audience was also largely Jewish. So Paul, like any experienced teacher, begins where his audience is mentally and spiritually.
Always a great thing to do when examining any part of Scripture. Take note of who’s the sender, who’s the receiver, and see if you can tell what the reason is for what’s being said.
They could seemingly not get passed The Old Covenant, “Old laws,” and the fact that there was now a “New Covenant” (Heb. 8:13, and Lk. 22”22-23.) That now is a time when we are no longer under) the (OLD) law, but rather we are now under a period of GRACE. (Rom. 6: 14-15.)
That’s great. Paul is talking to Jews, and this is the reason for saying what he does. What they are doing- specifically, clinging to the Old Covenant for their hope of justification- is not a good idea because it causes them to set aside the grace made available by Jesus and place their trust (instead) in something that isn’t sufficient.
And that is how people fall from grace. They misplace their hope for justification. They try to be justified by something other than the grace of Jesus. That’s what is described, and unless there’s some other passage that sheds further light on it, that’s how the term should be described.
I’ll admit that I’ve seen plenty of Protestants attach this term to Catholics and tell them they’ve “fallen from grace” because they try to be justified by something other than Christ’s grace. That’s not a good move because Catholics aren’t Jews, they aren’t holding to the Old Covenant, and (correct me if I’m wrong) they do not set aside Christ’s grace and try to be justified by something else.
On the other hand, though…talking about a “fall from grace” predicated by a mortal sin…that’s also not a good idea. The same comparisons aren’t even possible because this idea doesn’t attempt to conform to the problem and its process as laid out in Galatians. Paul tells the Galatians what their problem is and why it’s caused them to fall from grace. This section has to do with legalism concerning circumcision and why that’s a bad idea. It just doesn’t talk about mortal sin as a problem that would cause someone to fall from grace- at least not in this chapter.
If there are other assumptions I’d be happy to play along with your concerns
Thanks, Pat. I’ll take a look at other verses that talk about grace and see what comes up. Here’s the link- there’s 127 verses to look at, sorted by relevance. biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=grace&version1=31&searchtype=all&limit=none&wholewordsonly=no I’ll have to get back to this later, though.
Until then…
U
Usagi
Guest
All right, so the best translation is indeed “sin unto death.”
But, in English, don’t “unto death” and “mortal” mean the same thing? The “mortal” in the phrase “mortal sin” is used in the same way as in “mortal wound” – it means something that will kill you. To me, that fits “unto death” pretty well. “Mortal” as in the opposite of “immortal” may be a different Greek word, but that’s also a different meaning of “mortal” than we’re using.
Usagi
P
PJM
Guest
That is the general point I was trying to make. And of course we have no hard evidence of what Jesus was saying; or do we? John 20:23, Mt. 16:19.
A comprehensive, true and chaitatble explaination. Well done.:tiphat:
You win on the word “Mortal.” How ever am I to understand that “sin unto death” is not a synomous meaning of the word “Mortal?”
I’m only a HS graduate and no-where near the “sharpest knife in the drawer!”I can certainly understand why this would be such an issue with Protestants. Even using the KJV, there seems to exist much difficulty in supporting some of there positions. OSAS for example. Purgatory for another. The Eucharist as the most important. The issue of Justification, looms large in that arena.
I fail to see evidence of a varied Catholic Theology from the Vulgate, to the D-R. Catholics have always held that we are "the keepers of all TRUTH on matters of Faith and or Morals." I’ve read the KJV, and my guess is that it’s still about 90% the catholivc Bible, and indeed the D-R, I suspect was the foundational document for it. It is the Protestants of the time that did the picking and choosing, not the Catholic Church.
There seems to be a great deal of historical evidence of teachings by the earky Church Fathers that would support this understanding.
How then am I to understand “sin?” Does it not exist, or is simply a none issue because of the Redeemptive act of Christ? 1 Jn. 5: 13-17, Jn. 20:23, Mt.19:16, and related, Jn. 3:5
Please see next post, ran short of space
P
PJM
Guest
Part 2 of previous post
James chapter 2 is the clearest articulation of why we hold this belief, but there is also evidence in Romans and Ehphesians.
It seems to me a logical application of an All and everything good, and perfectly good Nature of God requires that God have and apply without preference, His Fairness and Justice. Were God not to do this, God simply could not and would not be God.
So here is a question for you.
You steal $50.00 from me (it’s not going to take food off my table) but in anger that you will not give it back to me, I kill you. Then as I run out of teh house, I get run over by a car and too killed.
Now we both have unrepented and unconfessed sin on our soul? (I say yes!)
Will, can, does God judge us the same? Might we both still end up in heaven?
Thanks, Pat. I’ll take a look at other verses that talk about grace and see what comes up. Here’s the link- there’s 127 verses to look at, sorted by relevance. biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=grace&version1=31&searchtype=all&limit=none&wholewordsonly=no I’ll have to get back to this later, though.
Until then…
Actually we strive to cooperate with God’s grace, thus we have and utilize the Seven Sacraments instituted by Christ. Especially Eucharist and Reconcillation. We do believe that while Redeemption is a done deal, salvation is not and has to be worked out in accord with God’s paln for Salvation.
James chapter 2 is the clearest articulation of why we hold this belief, but there is also evidence in Romans and Ehphesians.
I’m unsure if your reading too much into this verse or I’m not fully understanding everything that is being said.
It seems to me a logical application of an All and everything good, and perfectly good Nature of God requires that God have and apply without preference, His Fairness and Justice. Were God not to do this, God simply could not and would not be God.
So here is a question for you.
You steal $50.00 from me (it’s not going to take food off my table) but in anger that you will not give it back to me, I kill you. Then as I run out of teh house, I get run over by a car and too killed.
Now we both have unrepented and unconfessed sin on our soul? (I say yes!)
Will, can, does God judge us the same? Might we both still end up in heaven?
Thanks, Pat. I’ll take a look at other verses that talk about grace and see what comes up. Here’s the link- there’s 127 verses to look at, sorted by relevance. biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=grace&version1=31&searchtype=all&limit=none&wholewordsonly=no I’ll have to get back to this later, though.
Until then…
- Status