Humans were created sinful. Then we were told not to sin. Is that a fair demand?

[fons_vitae]

You know what babies, Down Syndrome kids, and other unfortunates you mentioned have in common? *They don’t have free will. *

I don’t know, I knew a boy with Down’s syndrome when I was in elementary. He seemed pretty independent. :3

To have free will is to sin.

Balderdash. Like someone else posted, what if I do something virtuous for once? Or does that “not count”?

 

[PRmerger]

You know what babies, Down Syndrome kids, and other unfortunates you mentioned have in common?

*They don’t have free will. * To have free will is to sin.

Thanks for making my point for me.

Um, I think you’re interjecting an opinion about a different discussion regarding free will.

As often happens in threads, a tangent developed and I was addressing whether Mary was sinless or not.

Someone was claiming that it says in the Bible that “all” have sinned.

I was merely showing that this “all” actually means “all with some exceptions. Several million exceptions, actually.”

Free will did not really enter this discussion.

But now that you’ve interjected it, do you believe Mary had free will?

 

[PRmerger]

If ALL have not sinned they DO NOT fall short of the glory of God. By biblical definition they are righteous enough then to go to heaven by their own righteousness. That is unscriptural. David said “In sin I was conceived.”This is a byproduct of the fall of Adam and encompasses the human condition. No matter how innocent or sinless a person may seem they are hopelessly lost with the stain of original sin. According to scripture Jesus is the only one without original sin because He was conceived by the Holy Spirit. Paternity determines ones sin nature.

Again, then, “all have sinned” is a “qualified” all. There’s exceptions, eh? At least one big one, then!

Now for the good news. It is God who calls and it is God who wills to totally and completely save those He has chosen apart from whom they are or what they have done. No one is ever good enough to go to heaven that’s why Jesus came to reconcile men back to God. He is the only way.

That is very Catholic of you to say that!

 

[PRmerger]

So do you believe then they went to heaven because they were NOT sinners? And didn’t need the blood of Jesus to enter in?

Outside of Christ there is no salvation. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church. Thus, anyone who is in heaven is there by the atoning blood of Christ.

 

[TimothyH]

So do you believe then they went to heaven because they were NOT sinners? And didn’t need the blood of Jesus to enter in?

No, the other way around. I believe they were not in a state of mortal sin because of the blood of Jesus and so the Blood of Jesus is the reason why they were able to enter heaven.

Blood of Jesus first, state of grace with mortal sin second, heaven third.

It was Christ’s redemtive work to take away the sins of the world which caused them to be in a state of grace, free from mortal sin.

Mary testifies to this when she called God her “Savior” and then proclaimed “The Lord has done great things for me.”

In doing so she acknowledged that it was God who had kept her free from sin. She was not yet aware of the fact that it was Christ’s specific redemtive work on the cross which had redeemed her from birth and which was the cause of her sinless state but she was aware that it was a work of God in her life nontheless.

It is the same for anyone who is capable of virtue, from Adam and Eve through the last person on earth at the end of time. It’s all because of Jesus. Jesus died “Once and for all.”

Personally, I try to be sinless at least once a month - when I step out of the confessional.

-Tim-

 

[The_Exodus]

God must have known what were the chances of each of billions of people using free will in order to sin.

There is no disagreement here, but you fail to make the fundamental distinction I brought to light: permitting a defective cause falling away is different than causing it do.

Indeed, it is metaphysically impossible for God to “cause” one to do evil, because evil is nothing more than a failure on the part of some cause. God is pure being, and cannot cause a thing to tend to non-being, though he can allow the thing to tend to non-being of itself.
york:

He will have seen that each individual has 100% chance of sinning in their lifetimes and that most sin (at least in their thoughts) on a minute to minute level of regularity. On that basis giving people free will amounts to making people sinful and expecting them not to sin is like asking them to hold their breath forever. A totally unrealistic and unfair request.

God did know that all people would sin in Adam and original sin would enter the world and corrupt the species. But again it doesn’t follow that God “made” Adam and humanity sin. He rather allowed them to. This is the distinction that needs to be understood.

Neither was the command given to Adam unfair or unrealistic. In fact, God created Adam without a nature predisposed to sin. Yet Adam allowed himself to be filled with pride. If, at the moment of temptation, he would have had recourse to God’s aid, he would have surely been helped. Yet God allowed him to fail to do this of himself.

Finally, God neither wills evil to be done (which is impossible), nor wills it not to be done (in which case there would be no evil), but allows it to be done, which is good. Also, by allowing evil, he can draw forth greater good. How then is there any injustice in God?

 

[The_Exodus]

york:

You know what babies, Down Syndrome kids, and other unfortunates you mentioned have in common?

These are good questions York, and I apologize if anyone is unkind in answering you.

Babies, however, cannot commit actual sin, since actual or personal sin must involve an act of reason, and babies are not able to reason. The same holds true for mentally retarded individuals. However, all humans – save Mary and Christ (which two exceptions are not relevant to your point anyway) – are implicated in the sin of Adam, since all humans inherit human nature. This makes them guilty of death, though not necessarily Hell, since one is sent to Hell except for actual sin, an act which cannot be performed by babies or those lacking reason. This is the teaching of St. Thomas, which can be found in the supplement to the Summa, and can be read online for free at newadvent.org.

 

[PRmerger]

Babies, however, cannot commit actual sin, since actual or personal sin must involve an act of reason, and babies are not able to reason. The same holds true for mentally retarded individuals. However, all humans – save Mary and Christ (which two exceptions are not relevant to your point anyway) – are implicated in the sin of Adam, since all humans inherit human nature.

 

[Yorkshireman]

Oh yea? Says who???

Job was “Blameless”

Mary did not sin.

Zechariah and his wife Elizabeth were “Righteous in the eyes of God, observing all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blamelessly.”*

Just like his mother and father, John the Baptist was “Full of the Holy Spirit even from his mother’s womb.”

-Tim-

You’ve come up with 2 or 3 although it’s only the word of the bible for it.*

So 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001% of humans that have ever lived haven’t sinned. The challenge not to sin, given that free will is a life long temptation dangler, is far too difficult to pass.*

Have you managed it so far? Course not.

 

[Yorkshireman]

In other words:
Humans are born with innate inclinations towards sin, innate self-destructive tendencies. Then they were told that they need not remain enslaved to these inclinations, that they could be saved from them by their cooperation with the grace of God and freed from their self-destructive tendencies. Is it reasonable to demand such cooperation?

And the obvious answer to your question: Yes.

Well 0.00000000000000000001% manage the challenge. It’s far easier to get in the marines or Britain’s paratroopers.

 

[jericho777]

Again, then, “all have sinned” is a “qualified” all. There’s exceptions, eh? At least one big one, then!

That is very Catholic of you to say that!

Let’s try this one then. Rom 3:10,12 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

This verse is very clear and leaves NO doubt there are NO exceptions. There are ZERO persons who are without sin. It is so emphatic that is says it THREE times to make it perfectly clear there are NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE. Righteous means without sin.

As to your second point “That is very Catholic of you to say that!” That’s not how the catholic folks here are talking. Thery are fretting about being sinless enough to get into heaven. They do not trust Christ and His finished work on the cross to be the only way into heaven. They are hoping their works will be acceptable enough or their own sinlessness will be small enough.

 

[PRmerger]

This verse is very clear and leaves NO doubt there are NO exceptions. There are ZERO persons who are without sin. It is so emphatic that is says it THREE times to make it perfectly clear there are NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE. Righteous means without sin.

Are you really sure you want to be saying the above, as a Christian?

Methinks that the atheists on this thread would have a heyday with your comment. And the Muslims, too. “See,” they’ll crow, “even your own bible claims that Jesus sinned. You have correctly pointed out that your very own Scriptures claim that there is NO doubt that there are NO exceptions, therefore, your Jesus is not who you claim he is. He’s a sinner just like the rest of us.”



Now, the Catholic has a response. Of course we know that when it says “there is none righteous”, the “none” is a qualified none. There are exceptions.

 

[PRmerger]

As to your second point “That is very Catholic of you to say that!” That’s not how the catholic folks here are talking. Thery are fretting about being sinless enough to get into heaven. They do not trust Christ and His finished work on the cross to be the only way into heaven. They are hoping their works will be acceptable enough or their own sinlessness will be small enough.

Firstly, could you please cite some of the posts by Catholics in which someone does not trust in the finished work of Christ?

Secondly, even if you could find some, what the average Joe-Catholic-in-the-pews thinks ought not be confused with what the Catholic Church proclaims.

Thus, you were indeed very Catholic in your response.

 

[jericho777]

No, the other way around. I believe they were not in a state of mortal sin because of the blood of Jesus and so the Blood of Jesus is the reason why they were able to enter heaven.

Blood of Jesus first, state of grace with mortal sin second, heaven third.

It was Christ’s redemtive work to take away the sins of the world which caused them to be in a state of grace, free from mortal sin.

Mary testifies to this when she called God her “Savior” and then proclaimed “The Lord has done great things for me.”

In doing so she acknowledged that it was God who had kept her free from sin. She was not yet aware of the fact that it was Christ’s specific redemtive work on the cross which had redeemed her from birth and which was the cause of her sinless state but she was aware that it was a work of God in her life nontheless.

It is the same for anyone who is capable of virtue, from Adam and Eve through the last person on earth at the end of time. It’s all because of Jesus. Jesus died “Once and for all.”

Personally, I try to be sinless at least once a month - when I step out of the confessional.

-Tim-

Hi Tim, You are correct and I would include all who have been bought by the blood of Jesus. That is the only way!

I would say Jesus’ blood cleanses us from all sins past present and future.

St Thomas Aquinas had a different view of Mary’s quote when he said “Only a sinner needs a Savior, and Mary must have been a sinner because she stated “My spirit rejoices in God my Savior.”

The bible says it’s Christ’s blood that cleanses us from all sin. It doesn’t keep us from sinning.

So do you believe there are people other than the ones you mentioned who were kept from original sin?

 

[jericho777]

Are you really sure you want to be saying the above, as a Christian?

Methinks that the atheists on this thread would have a heyday with your comment. And the Muslims, too. “See,” they’ll crow, “even your own bible claims that Jesus sinned. You have correctly pointed out that your very own Scriptures claim that there is NO doubt that there are NO exceptions, therefore, your Jesus is not who you claim he is. He’s a sinner just like the rest of us.”



Now, the Catholic has a response. Of course we know that when it says “there is none righteous”, the “none” is a qualified none. There are exceptions.

Jesus does not have Adam as His father. Paternity determines original sin. All in Adam have original sin.

When someone says three times there are ZERO righteous they mean it. He had plenty of oppourtunity to say otherwise but made that point point exceedingly strong. To say otherwise is to contradict scripture.

 

[jericho777]

Firstly, could you please cite some of the posts by Catholics in which someone does not trust in the finished work of Christ?

Secondly, even if you could find some, what the average Joe-Catholic-in-the-pews thinks ought not be confused with what the Catholic Church proclaims.

Thus, you were indeed very Catholic in your response.

Hi PR,The point is they are constantly saying they believe in Christ’s finished work on the cross and the suffeciency of His sacrifice but live in constant fear their actions will seperate them from God’s abundant grace. They hope their works are great enough and/or thier sins minimal enough to obtain salvation.

 

[PRmerger]

Jesus does not have Adam as His father. Paternity determines original sin. All in Adam have original sin.

Adam? Where was Adam’s name mentioned in the verse you cited? Isn’t that adding to Scripture?

If you’re going to say that there’s ZERO exceptions, then you’re going to have a very hard time evangelizing Muslims and atheists and Jews and…

I’m just sayin’. Be very careful about making that claim.

 

[PRmerger]

Hi PR,The point is they are constantly saying they believe in Christ’s finished work on the cross and the suffeciency of His sacrifice but live in constant fear their actions will seperate them from God’s abundant grace. They hope their works are great enough and/or thier sins minimal enough to obtain salvation.

This is close to showing contempt for Catholicism, jericho. You are misrepresenting Catholic teaching, and Catholics on this forum.

The CC does not teach that our works earn us our salvation.

 

[PRmerger]

St Thomas Aquinas had a different view of Mary’s quote when he said “Only a sinner needs a Savior, and Mary must have been a sinner because she stated “My spirit rejoices in God my Savior.”

Please cite your reference.

I am skeptical that he said this.

But, if you can provide the source (waiting…), it would contradict Church teaching and thus St. Thomas Aquinas had a wrong opinion on this.

 

[jericho777]

Adam? Where was Adam’s name mentioned in the verse you cited? Isn’t that adding to Scripture?

If you’re going to say that there’s ZERO exceptions, then you’re going to have a very hard time evangelizing Muslims and atheists and Jews and…

I’m just sayin’. Be very careful about making that claim.

1 Chor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Ha Ha Ha. Your scriptures say the same thing too.

I would be glad to talk to Muslims and atheists. I will share the truth and let God do the rest. Is 55:11 So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.