I am doing his bible study with him because I enjoy the time with my dad, which I would otherwise not have, and I hope to give him reason to think a little deeper about what he believes.
OK, that makes sense.
I don’t think it’s a no-no for Catholics to do bible studies with others, so long as the Catholic is confident and informed in their faith.
Yah, I was coming from the misunderstanding that a Protestant Bible Study would be on the “forbidden index,” so to speak. Thanx for clearing that up.
You must remember that salvation is not assured! There is a kind of sin that is deadly (can separate you from God). I see you quote Romans 8:38. While it is true that nothing EXTERNAL can separate you from God, the passage makes no mention of internal attitudes.
It says in that verse “nor things present nor things to come” as well as “nor anything else in all creation”: that seems to me pretty all-encompassing. Sin is definitely part and parcel of “all creation” and it is also present and future. (No, I’m not advocating “let’s just sin to our hearts content,” as you can see from my first response to the OP.)
KShaft, post #11:
…What the Apostles testified to seeing and hearing we are somewhat in the dark. They have seen it. They know. Faith to them is more like trusting the Lords word than believing in his existence…if even the disciples required such solid proofs to be convinced, then I believe that believers in modern times who struggle with faith are given some leeway.
What an interesting insight!
That never occurred to me.
what Luther claimed - that he could commit adultery 100 times day and it would not affect his justification before God.
Luther was a hyperbolist; his comment must be
taken in context. As the writer of
This Rock article correctly stated,
“Luther had failed to find peace of soul in ascetic self-discipline and efforts at “good works.” He never declared a good life unnecessary. His “pecca fortiter sed crede fortius” (sin boldly but believe still more firmly) was not meant to be an encouragement to yield to sin without scruple. He intended simply that however great a sinner one may be, granted repentance, he can be justified solely by faith. But to be zealous for good works, thinking them to be a means to salvation, was to manifest a lack of faith in God’s power to save." Again, Luther’s point was, “not to go out and murder or fornicate as much as possible, but rather to point out the infinite sacrifice of Christ’s atonement. There is no sin that Christ cannot cover. His atonement was of an infinite value.”
Your father would surely hold that there is a point at which sin moves from “not counting”, to a point where it counts as “falling away”. This indicates belief in a distinction between mortal and venial sin.
No, Protestants mean by “falling away,” that the person no longer cares a jot about Jesus or His atonement, in other words, plain old apostasy. One of the prime examples for Protestants of God’s incredible mercy in the face of heinous sin is David: not only did he fornicate and father a son out of wedlock, but he also had the husband of his paramour killed off. Yet, the N.T. calls him, “a man after God’s own heart.”
Secondly, I would add that his view in a sense indicates a work of fiction in the mind of God, because he believes that God ignores our sins, and they don’t matter. God, if you like, pretends we don’t sin. That doesn’t address the very real fact that we DO sin and we have a TENDENCY TO SIN.
Yes, unfortunately, sin is the thing that (to quote Paul) clings to us. But the imputation of Christ’s righteousness means that God doesn’t have to ignore our sins, bec. Jesus bore them all, thereby satisfying God’s justice:* It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be
just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.* (Romans 3:26)
This has to be addressed by God at some point because “nothing unclean shall enter [heaven], nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood”.
Think about the momentous “reconfiguration” of all those believers who’ll still be living when Christ returns at the final trumpet: the Scriptures say that “in the twinkling of an eye,” they will be transformed (into the everlasting body)—no need for Purgatory (why would they be exempt?). Recall, similarly, both the resurrection of putrid Lazarus, the restoration of the withered hand (and for that matter, just about every other healing miracle by Jesus): all involve instantaneous regeneration, instantaneous restoration to the pristine state. He is able to do the very same sort of thing at a person’s death: instant deliverance from whatever residue of sin might still be present. Also, the Revelation verse you cite is talking about habitual sinners, i.e. unregenerate persons, those who never came to Christ in the first place for the new life & forgiveness; the key word is “practice” (cf. John’s letter).
