Do Protestants Believe in Mortal Sins and Venial Sins?

[rben20]

…Perhaps it depends somewhat on the particular Protestant denomination.

You will find denominations teach differently but it all comes down to Scripture and Tradition. The Church teaches what is in the bible, that there are classes of sin. 1 John is very clear.

 

[Kristin234]

I grew up Southern Baptist. According to them, all sin is equal. According to the Southern Baptists if I kill someone, or if I drink a beer its all the same to God. Of course, Southern Baptists also believe in “once saved always saved.” So that If I’m “saved” in 1975, but I go on a killing spree ending in my own suicide in 2011, then no biggie. I still get to go to heaven the same as Billy Graham.

Peace,

I have never heard OSAS explained that way nor do I know any other Protestant that would agree with that.

To say that someone is saved and even though they go murder someone they are still saved without repentance or anything is ridiculous. I would question if that person was ever saved in the first place.

Once saved always saved definitely doesn’t = do whatever you want and you will go to heaven.

There is a difference between going off the road for a little and coming back to God (which did happen to some people in the Bible) and driving off the cliff and never coming back.

I’m not trying to argue because maybe that was what you were taught, but I myself have never heard it and I think that that is a ridiculous belief

 

[bogeydogg]

Can you explain what you mean by Adam not being deceived and yet committing a more serious sin than Eve.

Eve was tempted directly by the Serpent in the Garden and so her sin, while severe, was one of being drawn away into sin. Furthermore we know from her confession that they were not even to touch the tree that she did not understand fully God’s command because the command was to tend the tree but not to eat of it.

However Adam is not tempted by the Serpent. He merely sees that Eve has eaten of the fruit and not died immediately and decides for himself that he will overthrow God’s command without having been deceived as Eve was. His sin was not rebellion plus deception, but rebellion in full and clear understanding of what he was doing. Seeing that Eve has eaten and not died he takes it upon himself to eat and in doing so places his own judgment above God’s. His sin is more severe. His sin is committed with full knowledge of the consequences, intent, and a clear decision to rebel.

The reason why I think this is that Bible makes it clear over and over again that we are fallen in Adam and in his sin and not Eve even though it was Eve who first sinned.

God Bless

 

[bogeydogg]

Thanks to all for their informative responses! It seems there MAY be differences in kind and degree between sins, even along the lines of mortal vs. venial sins, although they are not named as such. On the other hand, some of you are saying that sin is sin and there are no real distinctions. Perhaps it depends somewhat on the particular Protestant denomination.

The problem with denominational theology is that it encourages people to read the Bible through the eyes of the “Greats” within that denomination. Thus it implicitly discourages free and open reading of the Scriptures which, ironically, is the very complaint of many protestants against the Roman Church. However if we believe that the Bible is the word of God then it is incumbent on us to believe it even if or when it seems to disagree with Martin Luther.

BTW my pastor and I have had some pretty colorful discussions because of this.

God Bless

 

[ndismyhome]

No, it means that your first interpretation is wrong and your second is correct in this particular case. We are speaking of a particular case (the verse in question), so only one possibility can be right.

I agree that the Bible is consistent in itself, if interpreted properly.

If I agree that “a” can be interpreted as “one” as well as “a kind of” then we **are **both right.

I mean, I believe, as the Bible (as my pastor keeps telling) is consistent in itself and explains itself, that a means “one” - you do otherwise!

Well, if it would help your guys’ dispute, the Greek doesn’t have indefinite articles. That portion, in question, would read literally:
“If anyone sees the brother of himself sinning (a) sin”…that is to say, the “a” is implied by the grammar, but is not present as there is no indefinite article in Greek.

 

[Calgar]

I grew up Southern Baptist. According to them, all sin is equal. According to the Southern Baptists if I kill someone, or if I drink a beer its all the same to God. Of course, Southern Baptists also believe in “once saved always saved.” So that If I’m “saved” in 1975, but I go on a killing spree ending in my own suicide in 2011, then no biggie. I still get to go to heaven the same as Billy Graham.

Peace,

lol. Not true.

Show me where drinking a beer is a sin?

And going on a killing spree and commiting suicide isn’t something a Christian would do.

And owning a Bible and going through a few ceremonies don’t make you a Christian.

God bless!

 

[Zenas]

“Beware of the scribes who like to walk around in long robes, and like respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation.”

These are the words of Jesus. Why would there be greater condemnation unless there were varying degres of sin?

 

[hn160]

To Lutherans, sin is sin, God hates all sin, the only unforgiveable sin, is the sin against the Holy Spirit which is to reject your Baptism.

 

[PJM]

=bogeydogg;8272323]I think this is easily settled, even though the Lutheran Church does not specifically use the language “venial” and “mortal” it does teach that some sin is more serious than others, the point is that in the Garden, Eve took the fruit first (and St Paul said she was deceived) and Adam took it without being deceived (and St Paul said that we died in Adam’s sin and not Eve’s). So it seems pretty clear that sin committed in error and lacking in a serious nature (venial) is less than sin committed with full knowledge, intent and severity (mortal).

So what’s the big controversy?

God Bless

I enjoyed your understanding; but Eve had [has] the SAME moral judgment as did Adam.

If “deception” midiagted the degree of culpubility; there would be NO Mortal sins; and yst there are MORE today than likely anytime in the history of the world. "Duplicity is the secound most used tool in Satans bag of “get’em’s” … Pride being the first.

Women were at the time [SADLY AND WRONGLY] considered inferior to men. [HOG WASH!]… but neverthess practice and mindset fo a very long time.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[steve_b]

Wow, you just made me stumble.

I now rethought it and I think John is indeed referring to the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Esdra,

As you can see from the following passage of 1 John & Colossians,

• Sin has a distinction between mortal and not mortal.
• John makes a point to keep away from idols. That’s not just images that are worshipped. Scripture is much broader in its definition. See the passage from Colossians that follows
• In your response, you discribe one sin which is mortal. Blaspheming the HS. Which is unrepentent till death. But there are other sins that ALSO lead to death, i.e. keep one from heaven, i.e. sends a soul to hell, not JUST blaspheming against the HS. See the passages from Colossians and Galatians

In 1 Jn 5:16…] (NASB)
16 If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death, you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that you should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.

18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the One who was born of God keeps them safe, and the evil one cannot harm them. 19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one. 20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. 21 Dear children, keep yourselves from idols.

Col 3:5
Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.

Idols/idolatry has a much wider meaning than worshiping things like a golden calf… true?

What happens if one dies in this type of sin mentioned?

Gal 5:
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this* will not inherit the kingdom of God. *

iow, any of these sins because they can send one to hell, are mortal sins (lead to death). But as John says, while all wrong doing is sin, not all sin is mortal. i.e. not all sin will send one to hell if they die in them.

btw, just in case you don’t agree with the terms mortal and venial because those terms don’t specifically appear in your translation, just look up the definition of “mortal” in the dictionary. It’s consistent with “lead to death”

ergo

sin that leads to death = mortal
sin that ≠ death = venial, (not deadly).
E:

I think the key is “a” - There is a = one (in German a and one is the same - I read it in the German Bible - I considered Luther and Elberfelder Bible) sin that leads to death - which is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, as I have written (and quoted) above.

All other sins can be forgiven, if we ask Jesus repentant for forgivness.

Verse 18 in the same chapter’s also interesting in this respect:

“18 We know that* no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him.*” (1 Jn 5:18 - NASB)

I quoted the passage previously, from the NASB. Your quote is misleading.

btw, I thought for sure you would have selected the following as the more interesting passage.

16 There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that you should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.

If one is not to pray about that type of sin for forgiveness, how then do Protestants get rid of mortal sin?

Certainly mortal sin is not impossible to commit in one’s life. Just look at the ones that are considered deadly sin.
E:

So, if we are indeed children of God, it is God who keeps us - and the Evil one does not have power over us. - This means if we stay in Him, and He stays in us, through studying and doing His word. (And the doing is really important - sadly enough I often have the feeling I do too less…)

The passage says,

18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the One who was born of God keeps them safe, and the evil one cannot harm them (NASB)

See the difference from how you state it?

 

[I_Thirst]

I’d imagine that there can be no definitive answer among Protestant denominations. One will preach one thing, and another will preach another thing. Repeat 33,000 times.

 

[steve_b]

To Lutherans, sin is sin, God hates all sin, the only unforgiveable sin, is the sin against the Holy Spirit which is to reject your Baptism.

“sin is sin” is highly misleading.

"all sin is wrongdoing, but not all sin leads to death " [1 Jn 5:17]

All sin is forgivable, except being unrepentent till death.

 

[ndismyhome]

All sin is forgivable, except being unrepentent till death.

Which, for Lutherans, is tantamount to denying one’s Baptism. In Lutheran theology, Baptism is the initial offering of God’s forgiveness (among other things). If one in any way denies the efficacy of God’s forgiveness, is unrepentant etc. he or she is denying his or her Baptism.

 

[bogeydogg]

I enjoyed your understanding; but Eve had [has] the SAME moral judgment as did Adam.

If “deception” midiagted the degree of culpubility; there would be NO Mortal sins; and yst there are MORE today than likely anytime in the history of the world. "Duplicity is the secound most used tool in Satans bag of “get’em’s” … Pride being the first.

Women were at the time [SADLY AND WRONGLY] considered inferior to men. [HOG WASH!]… but neverthess practice and mindset fo a very long time.

God Bless,
Pat

The distinction that I am making is not that deception itself mitigates the severity of sin, but the purpose of the sinner in the exercise of the will. I think Eve’s sin could almost be thought of as unintentional while Adam absolutely knew the right thing to do and deliberately chose wrong over right. WHich, if I have understood the CCC correctly, is the definition of mortal sin.

God Bless

 

[Esdra]

Hi steve,

First of all, thank for that post!

Right, I’ve grabbed my Barclay’s Commentary of the New Testament on that:

Barclay writes (after a lengthy and interesting discussion over the topic what the sin leading to death is/could be), that the sin leading to death (can only be) is denying that Jesus hase come in the flesh.

I have sadly enough this commentary in German only and so far, I haven’t found an online version of it. (And it’s far too much to translate it!)

But if you have a link to Barclay’s commentary in the net, I can show you what he writes about our verse in dispute.

As I believe that the bible explains itself, for me it’s also clear that a sin leading to death must be the denying of the Holy Spirit.

Do you also have verses that proove that there is more than one sin leading to death.? (the so called Mortal Sins?) (As denying that Jesus has come in the flesh, as well as denying the Holy Spirit is (according to the Trinity) is denying God, thus it’s ONE sin that leads to death in my understanding.

That’s what Baptists teach all the time by the way: You need to believe first in God and then that Jesus has come in the flesh and died for us on the cross so that we can have a relationship again with God which hasn’t been possible since Adam’s and Eve’s fall in the Garden of Eden. - So, naturally denying God (in whatever Person) means that you don’t want to have to do anything with Him, and God will accept that, with the consequence that you will die (and not resurrect) and will end in a place where God is not (commonly known as Hell! )

So, to conclude, there are TWO types of sins:

1. denying God (no matter in which person). which is the sin that leads to death
2. all other sins, which are in the eyes of God all the same severe! (as it says in the saying, “God hates the sin, but loves the sinners”).

And as you have pointed correctly out by quoting this verse:

18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the One who was born of God keeps them safe, and the evil one cannot harm them (NASB) (1 Jn 5:18)

it is true that Christians “aren’t be able to sin anymore”, as St. John (1 Jn 3:9) also writes again in his 1st letter, Chapter 3, Verse 9. Simply, because they will refrain from sin, because they know God and love Him and thus will do/follow His commandments
But we will sin, as it is in our nature to sin. We can’t do anything against it, no matter how hard we try to avoid it.
And God knows that, and he gave us a marvellous gift by sending His Son to earth who died for us on the cross and who shed His precious blood for us and thus cleansed us from all our sins, if we accept Him (*or *His sacrifice).
Jesus becomes for one who is born of God a Bridge between God and ourselves. We have a relationship - and if it happens that we sin, we can go repentful directly to God (with Jesus as a mediator if wanted) and we can be sure that He will forgive us because of the atonement of His Son. (cf. 1 John 1:7)

Answer from Esdra to:
steve b:

If one is not to pray about that type of sin for forgiveness, how then do Protestants get rid of mortal sin?

Protestants (that’s stupid. I won’t write about Protestants in General. - I meant Baptsits) don’t believe in that what Catholics call mortal sins (and name improper sexuality (like sex outside marriage) etc. - what you’ve written above, don’t want to copy that all), but only what I’ve written above in my post.
All other sins, if we repent, aren’t deadly. (If we don’t, by the way, every sin is deadly! Because sinning, no matter what sin, is rebellion against God! Otherwise it wouldn’t be a sin, would it?) And we can also pray for that and God will forgive us, if we are His.

in Christ,

 

[PJM]

=bogeydogg;8280671]The distinction that I am making is not that deception itself mitigates the severity of sin, but the purpose of the sinner in the exercise of the will. I think Eve’s sin could almost be thought of as unintentional while Adam absolutely knew the right thing to do and deliberately chose wrong over right. WHich, if I have understood the CCC correctly, is the definition of mortal sin.

God Bless

Actually I understood your point but it’s wrong.

Eve possessed the SAME identical gifts of a perfect existence as did Adam. If Eve was so innocent why did Satan even BOTHER tempting her? The ONLY thing; ONLY thing, that Adam and Lacked is the ONE thing [satam himself sought] and offered to EVE…key word “OFFERED” not commanded. Eve, like Satan, Like Adam made freewill INFORMED choices that they wanted the ONLY thing they were lacking “Being God.”

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Izdaari]

Are there any Protestant denominations which have a similar concept to that of Catholicism with regard to mortal sins and venial sins, or is this distinction found only in Catholicism? If there is a similar distinction in certain branches of Protestantism, what is the distinction? If not, what do various Protestant denominations say about the nature and types of sin?

’
C.S. Lewis, who was Anglican, wrote about them and explained them in a way that indicated he believed in the concept and took it seriously. And explained them very well too. However, Lewis may have been pretty close to Anglo-Catholic. And since Lewis played such a large part in forming my Christian faith, I may be a lot closer to Anglo-Catholic than is normal for a Pentecostal.

 

[Contarini]

Are there any Protestant denominations which have a similar concept to that of Catholicism with regard to mortal sins and venial sins, or is this distinction found only in Catholicism? If there is a similar distinction in certain branches of Protestantism, what is the distinction? If not, what do various Protestant denominations say about the nature and types of sin?

Wesleyans do in practice have a similar distinction (I refer to the tradition, not to the American denomination or even to the former British Methodist body of that name–both fo these are/were part of the broader tradition.)

Edwin

 

[bogeydogg]

Actually I understood your point but it’s wrong.

Eve possessed the SAME identical gifts of a perfect existence as did Adam. If Eve was so innocent why did Satan even BOTHER tempting her? The ONLY thing; ONLY thing, that Adam and Lacked is the ONE thing [satam himself sought] and offered to EVE…key word “OFFERED” not commanded. Eve, like Satan, Like Adam made freewill INFORMED choices that they wanted the ONLY thing they were lacking “Being God.”

God Bless,
Pat

Then why are we fallen in Adam’s sin and not Eve’s?

Why does St. Paul go out of his way to tell us that all have died in Adam?

Why does St. Paul tell us that Eve was deceived but makes no such claim about Adam?

God Bless

 

[Bluegoat]

Many people would say that some sins may do more damage to our relationship with God than others. It isn’t always clear what sins they are though, and I think often they are not what we think.

The idea that any one sin, not confessed before death, could absolutely result in one’s eternal separation to God is a bit - suspect to me in the way it is usually meant in Catholic circles. A sin like that which would result in so complete a rupture would have to be deliberate, consistent, complete, and knowing denial of God. That is the only way to get God out of our life completely, otherwise he will always remain in the bits we have left open or remain unaware of. That is, it is the sin against the Holy Ghost. That can be a brutal murder, or a small, everyday unkindness. It’s about deliberate hardening of the heart.

As far as Scripture goes, to understand the point I think we need to think about why the distinction is being made in the letter. And the point is in deciding when to separate oneself from others. In practice for individuals trying to lead the Christian life, I don’t think the distinction is terribly useful in helping us on our journey, and can actually be a hindrance.