OSAS/Calvinism/Armenianism (Again)

[heisenburg]

Thank you for your reply newbie…

I really only have one comment.

I agree the way a person acts does change, it better. I agree completely, but I also do not deny that there will be times i am going to disappoint God.The point I am saying, is if you dont ask for gods forgiveness when you fail, you are as you were before. Out in the cold, left wanting.

I pray you do not say something to the effect of there is only one “confession” needed. Or that once you are truely saved, you never have to ask for forgivness again. Ive had protestants tell em this before and frankly, it sounds alot like a sheeps in wolf clothing arguement to me. What better way for the devil than to get Christians to believe that they DONT have to ask for forgiveness of their sins, and STILL believe they are following Christ.

That being said, if you do sin, you are seperated from God. Someone seperated cannot enter into the Kingdom.

I hope you also dont say “Well, once you are saved, you wont sin anymore” Ive been told that too. You will still sin, but you will be amazingly aware of it and understand that you need to ask for forgiveness…

With respect to people who say they “know” when they are saved… I say, its possible, but Highly unlikly as it is like asking someone when they went from liking their wife, to loving. Some can tell you, but most will not be able to.
I can tell you when my journey began… The Death of Pope JP2. But somewhere between then and now, i slowly changed and became that new being. But I am a being that understands i do still sin and need gods continued grace, lest I get cut off from the vine…

In Christ

 

[newbie1234]

Thank you for your reply newbie…

I really only have one comment.

I agree the way a person acts does change, it better. I agree completely, but I also do not deny that there will be times i am going to disappoint God.The point I am saying, is if you dont ask for gods forgiveness when you fail, you are as you were before. Out in the cold, left wanting.

I pray you do not say something to the effect of there is only one “confession” needed. Or that once you are truely saved, you never have to ask for forgivness again. Ive had protestants tell em this before and frankly, it sounds alot like a sheeps in wolf clothing arguement to me. What better way for the devil than to get Christians to believe that they DONT have to ask for forgiveness of their sins, and STILL believe they are following Christ.

That being said, if you do sin, you are seperated from God. Someone seperated cannot enter into the Kingdom.

I hope you also dont say “Well, once you are saved, you wont sin anymore” Ive been told that too. You will still sin, but you will be amazingly aware of it and understand that you need to ask for forgiveness…

With respect to people who say they “know” when they are saved… I say, its possible, but Highly unlikly as it is like asking someone when they went from liking their wife, to loving. Some can tell you, but most will not be able to.
I can tell you when my journey began… The Death of Pope JP2. But somewhere between then and now, i slowly changed and became that new being. But I am a being that understands i do still sin and need gods continued grace, lest I get cut off from the vine…

In Christ

If you read Rom 8:1 you will see there is no condemnation for those that live according to the spirit but still sin.
Rom7:19, Paul says he sins because of his carnal nature. Even Paul sins.
I personally ask for forgiveness when I sin. There are weaknesses that I am working on.
And I fall often.
Rom8:1 does not give me carte blanche to do whatever I want because the would mean I am living in the flesh, not the spirit.
The HS is doing His sanctifying work in me. It is a long road along which I fall often.

 

[newbie1234]

I know for myself I can remember the exact moment the change occured.
I would be interested in hearing about your journey after the death of JP2 if it is not too personal.

 

[heisenburg]

Though i do not wish to get into a discussion in this thread about what 8.1 really says, but I wil offer you a differant understanding that you may or may not accept. However, i am merely trying to offer you an alternative understanding. While I do not agree with your understanding, it is not my intention to attack you for that undstanding. if I do come off as short or trite, please forgive me.

At the risk of doing the “what it says to me thing” How I understand with respect to Catholic Teaching, is as follows.

romans 8:1-17(ish) is absolutly talking about the premise that you do not have a sinful nature if you are in christ, if you are outside of christ you do. And yes, it does imply that your sin does not effect you if you are in christ. But saying that any sin you commit or will ever commit does not effect you is not exactly what that verse is saying. The entire underlying purpose for the Gosple is that Sin Seperates you from Him, and anyone seperated from him is not welcome in his kingdom. Now, Enter Christ, He takes the burden of your sin From you and puts it on him (im sure you know this). When you ask for forgiveness that first time … the whole coming to christ … all your previous sins are wipped clean. They no longer have any power to seperate you from christ. However, they still occured, and they are part of your history, God Knows this, but he says, those sins that you have asked for forgiveness from, I no longer will hold against you.

Thus… the power of sin cannot effect you while you are in christ…

a week, a month, whenever… some point later, you sin again. While you asked for forgiveness of all your past sins, it had NO effect on any future sin. Now, the stain of sin is once again on your soul… you are seperated from christ. THat unrepented sin has power over you… Easy fix… repent and mean it. The sin no longer has power. But like before, still exists, just isnt part of the final judgement.

So, yes, the sins of your past no longer have power over you if you are in christ, but the moment you sin, you seperate yourself from christ. Though the fix is easy… repent and mean it.

But if you dont repent, that sin is there glaring before god… Remember even scripture says that anyone who sins and says they are with god is a liar. It didnt exclude anyone, it applied to everyone… if you sin, yet say you are with god, you are a liar.

You cannot sin and not have it seperate you from God…

May you be blessed…

 

[NotWorthy]

If you read Rom 8:1 you will see there is no condemnation for those that live according to the spirit but still sin.
Rom7:19, Paul says he sins because of his carnal nature. Even Paul sins.
** I personally ask for forgiveness when I sin.** There are weaknesses that I am working on.
And I fall often.
Rom8:1 does not give me carte blanche to do whatever I want because the would mean I am living in the flesh, not the spirit.
The HS is doing His sanctifying work in me. It is a long road along which I fall often.

I’m curious, why don’t you confess your sins to a man and get forgiven? Didn’t Jesus specifically give this authority to men?

 

[exiled]

A Catholic comes out the Cathedral after confession and happy that he is sinless. On the way home he looks at a woman on the train with lust in his heart. That night he masturbates. The next day is Sunday, he chooses not to go to Mass because he is tired. Sunday night he dies, he goes to Hell.

Well, I would say that a sincere Catholic who goes to confession is VERY unlikely to miss Mass just for being tired. But, let’s say for the sake of arguement that your scenario is true. Right after commiting a mortal sin, most sincere Catholics would say to themselves, “Oh, God, what have I done!” or “****! I wish I wasn’t such a weakling”.
They would, indeed, be truly repentant, and I’m willing to venture the guess that they would find themselves in Heaven (after purgatory, but we don’t need to go into that subject yet) even though they have not confessed to a priest. Why? Because God knows what is in their hearts, and He also knows they did not have the opportunity to go to confession again before the moment of death.

The fundamental difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is that Mortal Sin in Catholicism is a threat to your salvation, but not to Protestantism, it is a threat to your rewards in heaven (you’ll probably be the least in heaven) but he’ll accept you.
Mortal sin is not a threat to salvation. Loss of salvation is a consequence of mortal sin. The only difference between what you are saying and what the church says is that you’re saying such a soul was never saved in the first place. The church says that indeed, such a soul has salvation available to him whenever he asks for it. Your mortal sinner would not lose his salvation because he has repented, same with the Catholic mortal sinner. (this sounds like Abbott and Costello’s "who’s on first routine)

 

[exiled]

Yes but the door swings both ways my friend.

If the Catholic Church is the real church then surely Satan would be happy to see as many as possible outside of her.

**But, if the Catholic Church is just one body in Christ’s spiritual church, then surely Satan is laughing that people are trusting in the dogma of men rather than the scriptures of God.

Satan is a corrupter, it’s all he does 24/7, he roams around like a lion seeking to devour whom he may.
Yes but the door swings both ways my friend.

If the Catholic Church is the real church then surely Satan would be happy to see as many as possible outside of her.

But, if the Catholic Church is just one body in Christ’s spiritual church, then surely Satan is laughing that people are trusting in the dogma of men rather than the scriptures of God.**

Well, let’s try this on for size. Let’s pretend that the whole world determines that the Catholic church is the True Church Christ established. Let’s also pretend that everyone was perfectly able to obey all of her tenets. What would we have? A perfect world. No abortion, no gay marriage, forgiveness, sacrifice for one another, corporal and spiritual works of mercy being done for others at all times.
On the other hand, let’s consider a world where everyone accepted Jesus Christ as Lord, and is perfectly able to obey all that they read in Scripture. What do you have? Division. Because some might perfectly obey the “love one another” and therefore support gay marriage. Some might practice infant baptism, some might not. Some might believe in the True Presence, some won’t. Do you get my point?
Even if everyone could perfectly obey what they learned from Scripture, they would still come up with a different moral code.
Dude you & I commit Mortal Sins everyday.
Well, I am not God, but as you’ve described your train incident, no Catholic would tell you that you had committed a mortal sin. Venial sin, probably, mortal sin, no way. In case no one has told you, there are three conditions for mortal sin. 1) the matter has to be a grave matter 2) you have to have full consent of the will and 3) you have to go ahead and commit the sin anyway. (Catholic friends, please correct me if I’m mistaken on any of this.) Your wandering eye is your fallen nature, yes. But, you did not willfully reject God’s command, so no mortal sin. If you then went home and decided to relieve yourself, after first considering how that act is offensive to God, but decided your relief was more important than His command, THAT would be a mortal sin.
I do not commit mortal sins every day. I can’t remember the last time I committed a mortal sin. It has been years since I purposely rejected God’s commandments.

 

[NotWorthy]

It would seem that mortal sin does bring punishment, as well as “in what I have failed to do…” if you just read Matthew’s parable of the sheep and the goats:

Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,

 

[exiled]

**B]

There’s going to be no easy answer to this but here goes.

God created sex to be enjoyed between husband and wife.

Sex, like eating, is good.

Sex, like eating, before sin had no consequences.

Sex, like eating, after the fall has consequences.

Now without being crude, lets explore this:

Let’s say a Catholic man wants to have as much sex as possible with his wife in a year without using birth control

.

**How many times can they have sex without using birth control?

Firstly, the first few times they do it, if neither have a medical problem, she’s going to concieve.

They then have until the end of the first tri-mester to have as much sex as possible, after that no sex until she gets out of hosptial and is sufficiently rested.

So, your average Catholic has what 4 months in total of unlimited sex?**
So unlimited sex is a holy and proper goal in marriage? Wrong. Sex is a benefit of marriage, the pleasures of which God gave us to ensure procreation and unity.

4 months dude.
Your numbers are WAY off!!

If you think a married man can abstain from masturbation or ‘extra’ activites during the second and third trimesters, then you’d have to be naive.
Okay, I can’t believe I’m going to answer this, but what the heck. If you, a celebate protestant man can abstain from sex, why can’t a married Catholic man?
Also, what the heck makes you think a woman in her 2nd and 3rd trimester can’t have sex?

This is a consequence of sin, sin spoils everything

**Now lets look at Protestants.

Protestants can use ABC and they can enjoy each other for 12 months of the year.**
They enjoy each other as an object of gratification, not in a holy, life-giving union that God intended for it to be. That, my friend, is lust, getting the sex without being willing to accept the life God just might want to create.

12 months.

Now maybe they are separated by a think layer of latex, or maybe it’s a sponge, or a pill (I don’t like the pill personally) but that’s a concession sin forces them to make.
They are separated by much more than that. I think you might need to speak to a woman. There are other threads in these forums where husbands or wives are trying to find out what is separating them in the bedroom. Most often you’ll find that the couple uses ABC, or they have other deviant sexual histories that are affecting their intimacy. Most couples who practice NFP are very intimate and satisfied on both an emotional and spiritual level. I guess that is another thread, though.
This, I do not understand. How does sin force them to use ABC?

Just like 4 months with the Catholics, sin always forces us to compromise.
We are never supposed to compromise with sin. We are to avoid sin, period.
**That pre-fallen state is gone.

Lastly on ABC, ask yourself what is the lesser of two evils, ABC or conception?**
Conception of a child is never an evil. We are called to overcome our natures, as individuals, as parents, as Christians.
I** think Columbia is a great example. The Catholic Church has said that condoms are the same as selling guns on the street.**But Columbia is one of the most dangerous places in the world. Kids live on the street because their parents can’t feed them. They join gangs and kill each other and other innocent people. They lose their faith (naturally), and many young men become gay prostitutes because they need money.
I think you’re getting way off base here.
Mortal sin everywhere.

But that’s the nature of sin, it forces you to make the choice, **who is going to take the responsibility for this sin?/**b]

Conception of a child is not the sin. Neglect of the child is, drug use is, and the selfishness of the rest of us who do not do our part to ease their suffering is.
The way I read what you’re saying, Jesus Himself should never have been conceived because sin is still everywhere. This is not a Christian arguement, nor is it really logical. Lots of holy people have come out of terrible childhoods, John Paul II being a great example. Adversity does not always produce despair.

For me, I’d much rather take a bunch of Mortal Sin for my lust, than produce a kid I didn’t really want at this time in my life, and who I might not have the means to provide for.

Egads! Being willing to choose sin over a child? Children are are like arrows in a quiver, according to Scripture. They are a blessing from the Lord. You would choose sin over a blessing from Him? I cannot number the things wrong with this!

**

 

[NotWorthy]

Exile, thank you for this defense. Like you, I felt there were so many presumptions in Rev.'s post, it would have taken too long to respond.

The least of which is the presumption to play God by deciding it’s better for a child to be aborted or contracepted than never being born.

Doesn’t that place us as gods?!?

Isn’t that the root cause of Adam’s sin to begin with?!?

Thanks again, exile!

 

[Revelation13_16]

Well, I would say that a sincere Catholic who goes to confession is VERY unlikely to miss Mass just for being tired.

It’s not unlikely

If there are 52 Sundays in a year (give or take) and a person lives to 70, and becomes a Catholic at 20, he or she should attend 2600 Sunday Masses (give or take) in his life.

If you’re telling me it’s unlikely he’ll miss one of those, I would disagree.

But, let’s say for the sake of arguement that your scenario is true. Right after commiting a mortal sin, most sincere Catholics would say to themselves, “Oh, God, what have I done!” or “****! I wish I wasn’t such a weakling”.
They would, indeed, be truly repentant, and I’m willing to venture the guess that they would find themselves in Heaven (after purgatory, but we don’t need to go into that subject yet) even though they have not confessed to a priest. Why? Because God knows what is in their hearts, and He also knows they did not have the opportunity to go to confession again before the moment of death.

I am just learning about Catholicism, but this seems different from what I have heard so far.

I like your view - for the record - but does the Church share it?

Mortal sin is not a threat to salvation. Loss of salvation is a consequence of mortal sin. The only difference between what you are saying and what the church says is that you’re saying such a soul was never saved in the first place. The church says that indeed, such a soul has salvation available to him whenever he asks for it. Your mortal sinner would not lose his salvation because he has repented, same with the Catholic mortal sinner. (this sounds like Abbott and Costello’s "who’s on first routine)

I was under the impression that the sacrament of Confession is a must.

My info comes from answers inthis thread and others like it.

Love,
Rev

 

[Revelation13_16]

Well, let’s try this on for size. Let’s pretend that the whole world determines that the Catholic church is the True Church Christ established. Let’s also pretend that everyone was perfectly able to obey all of her tenets. What would we have? A perfect world. No abortion, no gay marriage, forgiveness, sacrifice for one another, corporal and spiritual works of mercy being done for others at all times.
On the other hand, let’s consider a world where everyone accepted Jesus Christ as Lord, and is perfectly able to obey all that they read in Scripture. What do you have? Division. Because some might perfectly obey the “love one another” and therefore support gay marriage. Some might practice infant baptism, some might not. Some might believe in the True Presence, some won’t. Do you get my point?
Even if everyone could perfectly obey what they learned from Scripture, they would still come up with a different moral code.

I think both examples are flawed.

If everyone became a Christian (comprising both concepts for a minute) the world would be a better place, but still not perfect.

Catholicism has the comfortability of unity, but I think if everyone was a Christian under the Protestant scheme the divisions wouldn’t be too great.

Gays wouldn’t participate in gay marriage because from Romans 1:28 and the story of Sodom & Gomorrah they’d know that God doesn’t endorse it.

The gay christians you see now who want it are disobedient, and it’s debatable whether they are christians or not.

Infant Baptism wouldn’t exist because it’s extra-biblical, knowledge of Greek confirms this.

Transubstantiation, Consubstantiation, Real Prescence etc wouldn’t be an issue because people would just say “it’s a mystery” and perform the act.

Humans aren’t perfect, the Bible says there will only be a perfect world when Christ establishes his millenial kingdom.

But I do see the point you were making, the unity of Catholicism is more appealing.

Well, I am not God, but as you’ve described your train incident, no Catholic would tell you that you had committed a mortal sin. Venial sin, probably, mortal sin, no way. In case no one has told you, there are three conditions for mortal sin. 1) the matter has to be a grave matter 2) you have to have full consent of the will and 3) you have to go ahead and commit the sin anyway. (Catholic friends, please correct me if I’m mistaken on any of this.) Your wandering eye is your fallen nature, yes. But, you did not willfully reject God’s command, so no mortal sin.

Ok, after the first couple of venial sins then I looked again quickly.

It’s a hard road.

Love,
Rev

 

[exiled]

The sacrament of confession is a must for mortal sin, provided of course, that you have had the opportunity to go to confession. But one must go to confession as soon as they are able.
As a rule, confession is regularly scheduled at any Catholic church on Saturday afternoons. If a person is in mortal sin, they could call a priest and scoot over their right away to confess. But, and someone else can jump in here, most Catholics would likely wait until the Saturday confessions, and go on the first possible Saturday. You will find all of the wonderful people here can better assist you in linking to the church’s official teaching, but I’ve given it to you in a nutshell.
As for missing Mass, you must not know many practicing Catholics. Sunday revolves around Mass, period. I do not go anywhere, or make any plans unless I’ve worshipped God at Mass. Surely you can see, by your own love of God, how practicing Catholics *get to go *to Mass, we don’t *have to *go to Mass.
I didn’t even miss Mass the Sunday morning that my beloved father died. Now, we were blessed by having all been worshipping in the same church, so the priest knew our whole family. When we called to tell him Dad had died, the next question we asked was, “will you come to the house and celebrate Mass” (Dad died at home at 7:45 on a Sunday morning) because it would have been a challenge to get there with the funeral home coming, but I guarantee you we would’ve gone to a late evening Mass at another church if our priest had not been able to come.

 

[Revelation13_16]

So unlimited sex is a holy and proper goal in marriage? Wrong. Sex is a benefit of marriage, the pleasures of which God gave us to ensure procreation and unity.

To rephrase it then, how many times can you and your wife enjoy this benefit of marriage?

4 months dude.
Your numbers are WAY off!!

Enlighten me.

If you think a married man can abstain from masturbation or ‘extra’ activites during the second and third trimesters, then you’d have to be naive.
Okay, I can’t believe I’m going to answer this, but what the heck. If you, a celebate protestant man can abstain from sex, why can’t a married Catholic man?

I can’t completely.

It’s not the drive - for me at least - I can control that, but after a month or so you get a Nocturnal Emission.

St. Augustine I believed said it was not a sin for this to happen, but it’s most unpleasant.

Furthermore, science has shown that not masturbating at least once a fortnight can lead to an increase in prostrate cancer.

It’s a hard road.

Also, what the heck makes you think a woman in her 2nd and 3rd trimester can’t have sex?

Dude that’s gross, and I’m pretty sure doctors don’t recommend it in the third trimester. (not sure about the second, but I’m not sure I’d risk it.

They enjoy each other as an object of gratification, not in a holy, life-giving union that God intended for it to be. That, my friend, is lust, getting the sex without being willing to accept the life God just might want to create.

No, lust is selfish, love is not.

The fact that you married her and agreed to be faithful to her only in sickness and health until death shows love.

Don’t get sex twisted my friend, God created it.

Pornography and modern society perverts it, but sex as God created it can be enjoyed as often as it doesn’t become sinful in a christian marriage.

They are separated by much more than that. I think you might need to speak to a woman. There are other threads in these forums where husbands or wives are trying to find out what is separating them in the bedroom. Most often you’ll find that the couple uses ABC, or they have other deviant sexual histories that are affecting their intimacy. Most couples who practice NFP are very intimate and satisfied on both an emotional and spiritual level. I guess that is another thread, though.

How are they seperated by “much more than that” if she’s on the pill?

What is NFP also?

This, I do not understand. How does sin force them to use ABC?

If you feel that you cannot accomodate a child at this point in your life, but create one because you’re a newly wed and have to consumate your marriage, surely that is a sin.

Just like 4 months with the Catholics, sin always forces us to compromise.
We are never supposed to compromise with sin. We are to avoid sin, period.

Either you are a saint or not thinking about this deep enough.

In many situations we choose between two different sins, “the lesser of two evils” so to speak.

Sin always forces us to compromise, we don’t work with it, we work against it.

Conception of a child is never an evil. We are called to overcome our natures, as individuals, as parents, as Christians.

Let’s say your dirt poor and can barely feed yourself, you live in a bad area around gangs of crimminals and you and your husband/wife cannot move.

Is it a sin to wish that situation on someone else? (your child)

I think you’re getting way off base here.

I think you know you can’t defend this.

Conception of a child is not the sin. Neglect of the child is, drug use is, and the selfishness of the rest of us who do not do our part to ease their suffering is.

Did you see what you wrote?

“The selfishness of the rest of us who do not do our part to ease their suffering is (a sin)”

Ergo, if you bring a child into a bad situation, you are not easing that child’s suffering, you are causing it by your own selfishness!

You want sex, but you don’t want to sin by using ABC, but you will bring a child into an impoverished and dangerous environment.

What about “love thy neighbour as you love yourself”? (Jesus’ second greatest commandment)

If you wouldn’t wish the current situation you are in on your child, but you do it, then you don’t love your child, and you don’t love yourself.

That is lust.

The way I read what you’re saying, Jesus Himself should never have been conceived because sin is still everywhere.

No, that’s different.

Jesus came into the world to free sinners, he had to come.

Everyone else though, didn’t.

continued

 

[Revelation13_16]

This is not a Christian arguement, nor is it really logical. Lots of holy people have come out of terrible childhoods, John Paul II being a great example. Adversity does not always produce despair.

The ratio of JP2’s compared to murdered/raped innocent victims and people who were once innocent but turned bad because of the circumstances of life astronomically favours the lost.

Where are their souls going? Probably hell.

Who’s to blame? Their parents.

It’s hard for you to understand because you probably come from a good home, but that just means you’re out of touch.

In fact, it’s fine for the Pope to sit on the throne in Italy and dictate how things should be, but I’d also say

For me, I’d much rather take a bunch of Mortal Sin for my lust, than produce a kid I didn’t really want at this time in my life, and who I might not have the means to provide for.

Egads! Being willing to choose sin over a child? Children are are like arrows in a quiver, according to Scripture. They are a blessing from the Lord. You would choose sin over a blessing from Him? I cannot number the things wrong with this!

I grew up in a very poor area.

Many of the people I know have gone off the rails.

Some have died, others live in sin, but all are without God. (some were Catholics too)

I have seen babies having babies, searching for that love they never had for their parents, only to become like them and fight amongst themselves.

I have seen the innocent hurt, time and time again.

Excuse me if I’ll have no part in that.

Excuse me if I choose not to breed.

But I believe unless you can provide for your child and want a child, you should not create one.

If that means as a Catholic, you don’t marry, fine, stay celebant.

You see? Sin forces a compromise.

The Catholic who doesn’t want a child can always choose not to marry (Paul recommended it) but most don’t because they “burn with passion” (as Paul said)

So who suffers in Colombia for their passion?

The children.

At least I’m man enough to take my own sin on my own soul, and not create some kid to be fed to the wolves and possibly lose their life and soul.

Love,
Rev

 

[NotWorthy]

I was under the impression that the sacrament of Confession is a must.

My info comes from answers inthis thread and others like it.

Love,
Rev

If someone desires confession but dies before he is able to go, the Church teaches that these sins are forgiven through the Divine Justice of God.

The same holds with Baptism. If someone dies while going through the RCIA process, then they certianly will not be held liable for this delay. It’s called a Baptism of Desire.

 

[Revelation13_16]

The least of which is the presumption to play God by deciding it’s better for a child to be aborted or contracepted than never being born.

Doesn’t that place us as gods?!?

Isn’t that the root cause of Adam’s sin to begin with?!?

Your heart is in the right place NotWorthy, but you are ignorant of the scriptures my friend:

Genesis 3:5 Serpent talking to Eve

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Genesis 3:22 God talking to Adam

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

What happened here?

We were created with no knowledge of good and evil, we had no burden of responsibility to decide what is good and what is evil

That … is totally bliss & freedom.

Now Satan essentially told the truth, that they would be as gods, but he didn’t tell them the whole truth.

God even confirmed that man had become as one of us.

But look at the second half of Genesis 3:22 :

and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

God was saying that the fruit of the tree makes you as god but eating the actual tree (or more fruit - it’s unclear), fulfils it and makes you eternal.

So we now, have the ability to discern what is good and evil, just like God has his moral laws, we can make our own.

Now ofcourse, since God is God, his laws override ours, we must submit, but we can deduce what is right and wrong.

In regards to contraception & children, the Bible says nothing about this, it’s a teaching from the Catholic Church.

Likewise the sacrament of marriage, Paul says you do well not to marry, so don’t more poor Catholics simply not marry?

I can accept that contraception in marriage is wrong, if you can accept marriage of poor people is wrong. (since marriage will ultimately lead to contraception)

The best thing is truly not to marry then.

Love,
Rev

 

[Revelation13_16]

but I guarantee you we would’ve gone to a late evening Mass at another church if our priest had not been able to come.

Condolences for your father.

I still think one time in your life you’ll willfully miss a sunday mass though.

Life happens.

Love,
Rev

 

[NotWorthy]

Your heart is in the right place NotWorthy, but you are ignorant of the scriptures my friend:

Genesis 3:5 Serpent talking to Eve

Genesis 3:22 God talking to Adam

What happened here?

We were created with no knowledge of good and evil, we had no burden of responsibility to decide what is good and what is evil

That … is totally bliss & freedom.

Now Satan essentially told the truth, that they would be as gods, but he didn’t tell them the whole truth.

God even confirmed that man had become as one of us.

But look at the second half of Genesis 3:22 :

God was saying that the fruit of the tree makes you as god but eating the actual tree (or more fruit - it’s unclear), fulfils it and makes you eternal.

So we now, have the ability to discern what is good and evil, just like God has his moral laws, we can make our own.

Now ofcourse, since God is God, his laws override ours, we must submit, but we can deduce what is right and wrong.

In regards to contraception & children, the Bible says nothing about this, it’s a teaching from the Catholic Church.

Likewise the sacrament of marriage, Paul says you do well not to marry, so don’t more poor Catholics simply not marry?

I can accept that contraception in marriage is wrong, if you can accept marriage of poor people is wrong. (since marriage will ultimately lead to contraception)

The best thing is truly not to marry then.

Love,
Rev

No, because God created Life and said “It is good”. Man is bending that rule to say, “Well only those born under the right and proper circumstances”.

You’re acting like no good can come from being poor. Yes, the odds are against anyone born poor, but the rewards we are all looking for should be in heaven, not earth.

And besides, you know Paul’s writings well enough to know that he considered marriage a beautiful thing as well.

 

[Revelation13_16]

No, because God created Life and said “It is good”.

Now you’re bending God’s pre-fall words to apply them post-fall.

“there is none righteous, no not one”

Man is bending that rule to say, “Well only those born under the right and proper circumstances”.

We can discern good from evil.

Ethics.

You’re acting like no good can come from being poor. Yes, the odds are against anyone born poor, but the rewards we are all looking for should be in heaven, not earth.

If you have never been poor, you know nothing. (sorry)

And besides, you know Paul’s writings well enough to know that he considered marriage a beautiful thing as well.

Paul prefered it if people could be like him, but if they couldn’t then to marry.

Paul believed an unmarried person can be closer to God than a married person, this is true.

You’re valuing Catholic teaching above Paul’s writings.

Love,
Rev