Protestants: Scripture and Mortal Sin

[Atreyu]

Atreyu,
There are many other Scriptures that Protestants ignore or are passive about and this is one of them.
I don’t agree with their interpretations or lack thereof - Although I still attend my anti-catholic fundamentalist independent baptist church, I am out of synch with them on many levels. I think the passage is referring to mortal and venial sins and there are degrees of sin.

I see. I probably should have read your profile before responding to you, sorry about that.

Pax tecum.

 

[RobGentner]

Twiggy, it sounds to me as if you’re saying you just ignore the passage. Is that true? If not, then what do you think it means?

I am not sure twiggy know what to believe. Protestant ignoring parts of the Bible? That is how they became Protestants in the first place. Ignoring things they don’t agree with or changing them. KJV He said: " I still attend my anti-catholic fundamentalist independent baptist church" So I guess he came here to learn about his enemy? Or maybe because he realizes that we have many simularities or maybe he is seeking the true church and stopped by to explore ours even if he is anti-catholic

Protestants don’t know what they believe except that the Catholic Church is wrong. It should be apparant that there is SIN even if the Bible didn’t say there was. But if they do believe in the authority of the Bible how can they deny that there are degrees of sin?
There are degrees of every thing else you can think of, yet the most important thingthat can separate you apart from God, they think there are no degrees. You can’t be a little apart from God, it is all or nothing at all? Hmmm wakes me wonder :whacky: Isn’t that precious idea? :clapping:

This is a great thread that should prove interesting:thumbsup: :

 

[RobGentner]

My Friends, Tomorrow Is My Birthday! So
As My Gift To You, I Present You The Following:

’MEET ME IN THE STAIRWELL’
**
You say you will never forget where you were when
you heard the news On September 11, 2001.
Neither will I.

I was on the 110th floor in a smoke filled room
with a man who called his wife to say ‘Good-Bye.’ I
held his fingers steady as he dialed. I gave him the
peace to say, ‘Honey , I am not going to make it, but it
is OK…I am ready to go.’

I was with his wife when he called as she fed
breakfast to their children. I held her up as she
tried to understand his words and as she realized
he wasn’t coming home that night.

I was in the stairwell of the 23rd floor when a
woman cried out to Me for help. ‘I have been
knocking on the door of your heart for 50 years!’ I said.
‘Of course I will show you the way home - only
believe in Me now.’

I was at the base of the building with the Priest
ministering to the injured and devastated souls.
I took him home to tend to his Flock in Heaven. He
heard my voice and answered.

I was on all four of those planes, in every seat,
with every prayer. I was with the crew as they
were overtaken. I was in the very hearts of the
believers there, comforting and assuring them that their
faith has saved them.

I was in Texas , Virginia , California , Michigan , Afghanistan …
I was standing next to you when you heard the terrible news.
Did you sense Me?

I want you to know that I saw every face. I knew
every name - though not all know Me. Some met Me
for the first time on the 86th floor.

Some sought Me with their last breath.
Some couldn’t hear Me calling to them through the
smoke and flames; ‘Come to Me… this way… take
my hand.’ Some chose, for the final time, to ignore Me.
But, I was there.

I did not place you in the Tower that day. You
may not know why, but I do. However, if you were
there in that explosive moment in time, would you have
reached for Me?

Sept. 11, 2001, was not the end of the journey
for you. But someday your journey will end… And I
will be there for you as well. Seek Me now while I may
be found. Then, at any moment, you know you are
‘ready to go.’

I will be in the stairwell of your final moments.

God **

During the next 60 seconds, stop whatever you are doing, and take this opportunity. (Literally it is only 1 minute.) All you have to do is the following:

Stop and think and appreciate God’s power in your life, for doing what you know is pleasing to Him.

 

[mmmcounts]

bible.org/page.php?page_id=2070
That’s the link to the source you claim doesn’t exist- or the one you haven’t seen yet; whatever you like.

Summary: Here the author asks his readers to pray for the fellow believer who commits a sin not resulting in death. The sin resulting in death, on the other hand, is the sin of the secessionist opponents, whom the author has consistently regarded as unbelievers (spoken of earlier in 1 John).

2:19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us, because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us. 3:14 We know that we have crossed over from death to life because we love our fellow Christians. The one who does not love remains in death.

This source addresses three possible interpretations of this verse, including one similar to your own. It identifies strong and weak points for all three, but determines that the third one is the best. Please do read it. The challenge for the chosen explanation lies in how it regards the “sins leading to death” as referring to unbelievers rather than believers. But why would the author address himself to unbelievers at this point?

The comment about the “sin resulting in death” in 5:16 is somewhat parenthetical in nature: “If anyone should see his brother committing a sin not resulting in death, he shall ask, and he [God] will grant life him, to those who sin not to death. (There is a ‘sin resulting in death.’ I do not say that he should ask concerning this.)” The unbelievers whom the author has in mind at this point, who have committed this ‘sin resulting in death’, are the opponents, whom the author has consistently regarded as unbelievers (1 John 2:19, 3:14-15, 3:17). The opponents, who seceded from the community of believers to which the author is writing, showed by their departure that they did not belong to it and never really were believers to begin with. They have departed into the world (1 John 4:1) and the world has received them as its own. In the Farewell Discourse in the Gospel of John when Jesus prayed for his disciples he specifically excluded “the world” from his prayer (John 17:9). With Jesus’ own refusal to pray for the world as precedent, it makes perfect sense to understand the author of 1 John as discouraging his readers from praying for the opponents (who may claim to be fellow-believers, but really belong to the world). Thus the “sin resulting to death” in 1 John 5:16 refers to the apostasy of the opponents, which has marked them as unbelievers and sealed their fate. Refusal to believe in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God (cf. John 20:31 and 1 John 5:12) is the one sin which cannot be forgiven, because it denies the only means of forgiveness there is.

Just two verses later, we see this:

5:18 We know that everyone fathered by God does not sin, but God protects the one he has fathered and the evil one cannot touch him.

This, along with the content in and leading up to verse 13, constitutes some very un-Catholic material that usually results in Catholics expressing thankfulness for the authority of a hierarchical leadership that can teach them better than the Bible can. (Side note: My dad became a Christian while in med school, initially because of his Catholic girlfriend. 1 John 5:13- and the Catholic denial of it- was one of the main factors that made him unable to become a Roman Catholic). This verse tells us God protects His children; something the Catholic church regularly denies. It also says children of God do not sin. Within your framework of understanding the verses we’ve looked at so far, this makes no sense. Since the author has just said that believers do sin (5:16), when he says here that everyone fathered by God does not sin, he must be referring to the sin to death committed by the opponents. Genuine believers do not commit that.

I contend that your chosen interpretation of 1 John 5:16 causes 1 John 5:18 to make no sense at all, and you should consider the possibility that children of God commit sins that do not lead to death while the sin that does lead to death is committed by unbelievers of different varieties, including the ones talked about in 2:19 of the same book- but not by those “fathered by God.” This verse mirrors what we see in 1 John 3:4-10.

The only way you could believe this verse “clearly teaches the concept of mortal and venial sin” is if you are reading in a confused manner and choose to remain ignorant of how such confusion is quickly upset just two verses later, as well as two chapters previous.

 

[Idaho]

This passage clearly shows that there is mortal sin; that once saved always saved is not Biblical.

I am confused.
The Bible talks about a “sin unto death.”
The Bible in many places talks about the need to persevere to the end.

So yes, it is obvious that a person can be saved, and then later fall away from the faith and not be saved.

But this is the part that confuses me:

QUESTION: In the Catholic church, is “MORTAL SIN” the same as this “unforgiveable sin” that is mentioned in this passage?

***If ***it is the same, then it is unforgiveable.
If it is unforgiveable, then… it can’t be forgiven.
Right?
So… why does the Church say that it CAN be forgiven (by a priest, after confession and pennance) if it is unforgiveable?

I do not mean this question in order to engage in a debate with anyone. I mean… I am genuinely confused!

Can anyone clarify this for me?
Thanks very much, in advance.
—Idaho

 

[Atreyu]

I’ll skip some of your post to get to the most relevant parts.

This source addresses three possible interpretations of this verse, including one similar to your own.

Actually, the interpretation I agree with most closely is the third one, which interprets “death” as “spiritual death”. I just disagree with one point of his. The verse says: “If anyone sees his brother commit a sin… I refer to those who whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death.” My interpretation necessitates that the “sin that leads to death” can be committed by a believer; a brother. And I find your link’s dismissal of this interpretation to be dissatisfying. The author of this article confuses “sin” (which is an action) with “unbelief” (which is a state). He does this at a crucial time, which I will come to later on.

The opponents, who seceded from the community of believers to which the author is writing, showed by their departure that they did not belong to it and never really were believers to begin with.

How can he say they weren’t believers to begin with? I don’t think the auther has shown this (although I did only read what I thought were the relevant parts, so I might have missed it).
Now, back to where I said the author confuses sin with unbelief. Immediately before the paragraph you quote above, the author says:

Many interpreters assume that a brother likewise could commit the “sin to death” (in which case the readers are instructed not to pray for them) but the author does not say this. Within the antithetical (either/or) framework of Johannine thought, believers possess eternal life (John 5:24, 1 John 3:14a) while unbelievers remain in darkness, that is, spiritual death (John 3:19-20, 1 John 3:14b). Thus the “sin resulting in death” is a sin committed not by believers but by unbelievers. The problem with this view is that 1 John is clearly being written to believer, not unbelievers. Why would the author address himself at this point to the situation of unbelievers?

I agree with the underlined and disagree with the bold, and to me this is the crux of the whole issue. Unfortunately for your argument however, those three verses cited only mention belief once, in John 5:24. The others say:
1 John 3:14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers. Anyone who does not love remains in death.
John 3:19-20 Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil [ie sin]. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds [sins] hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed.
From the rest of the author’s argument, I assume he thinks the verse should read as such:
5:16 If anyone sees his fellow Christian committing a sin not resulting in death, he should ask, and God will grant life to the person who commits a sin not resulting in death. Then there is unbelief. I do not say that he should ask about that.
But unbelief and sin are two utterly different things.

Just two verses later, we see this:

5:18 We know that everyone fathered by God does not sin, but God protects the one he has fathered and the evil one cannot touch him.

This, along with the content in and leading up to verse 13, constitutes some very un-Catholic material that usually results in Catholics expressing thankfulness for the authority of a hierarchical leadership that can teach them better than the Bible can.

Yes well there are some very difficult passages in the Bible that may lead us astray if we misinterpret them. Now my RSV translates the passage as follows:
We know that any one born of God does not sin, but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him.
The auther states:

Since the author has just said that believers do sin (5:16), when he says here that everyone fathered by God does not sin, he must be referring to the sin to death committed by the opponents.

But the author believes that the sin to death is unbelief, which he believes cannot be committed by a believer, and so this sin obviously cannot be committed by someone born of God! It is interpreting the verse as:
We know that believers [those born of God] are not unbelievers [those who sin unto death]
Now that’s an interpretation that doesn’t make sense. As for my understanding of this verse, I’m not sure I would identify the “sin” in question with the “sin that leads to death”, but I can’t think of anything clearer at the moment, so my interpretation would be something like:
We know that anyone born of God does not commit mortal sin because Christ keeps him and the evil one cannot touch him.
What is left unsaid is that if someone “born of God” does commit a mortal sin, then they are no longer born of God. I know that it is an interpolation, but I don’t think that it actually contradicts the verse, which says “does not sin”, rather than “can not sin”.

Finally, you said:

This verse tells us God protects His children; something the Catholic church regularly denies.

Well that’s news to me! Who denies this? I think you should either back up this accusation or retract it.

 

[Atreyu]

I am confused.
The Bible talks about a “sin unto death.”
The Bible in many places talks about the need to persevere to the end.

So yes, it is obvious that a person can be saved, and then later fall away from the faith and not be saved.

It doesn’t seem to be obvious to everyone…

But this is the part that confuses me:

QUESTION: In the Catholic church, is “MORTAL SIN” the same as this “unforgiveable sin” that is mentioned in this passage?

Not exactly. My understanding is that the “unforgiveable sin” is final impenitence. This is linked to mortal sin, as a believer must commit a sin to lose sanctifying grace. Once the believer has lost sanctifying grace, it can be restored through the Sacrament of Reconciliation. But if the person dies while in the state of mortal sin, then the sin cannot be forgiven; it is unforgiveable (note that a sinner might repent on their death bed without the Sacrament being available - I have no idea how rare or common this may be).

I do not mean this question in order to engage in a debate with anyone. I mean… I am genuinely confused!

No problem. It is a confusing topic and I can’t say I completely understand it myself. Hopefully someone else will jump on and explain a bit more.

 

[mmmcounts]

We know that anyone born of God does not commit mortal sin because Christ keeps him and the evil one cannot touch him.

One quick problem with your chosen interpretation: The Catholic Church states that all those who are born of God do commit mortal sin pretty regularly, lose their salvation, and must regain it through confession, some works, and maybe a few Hail Marys.

In the interpretation that you’ve presented, you’ve inserted “mortal sin” into a verse that says “anyone born of God does not commit [mortal sin].”

That’s just my 30-second once-over. I’ll be back at it later on.

Right now, though, it’s time for breakfast.

 

[alanjeddy]

In the final analysis, with regard to the loss of Sanctifying Grace and the commission of a mortal sin, we have to let God be the judge. For He alone knows the depth of that person’s intentions. God is Love and His mercy is an unending ocean. I also know that He is Devine Justice.

I shall pass through this world but once. Any good therefore that I can do or any kindness that I can show to any human being, let me not defer or neglect it, for I shall not pass this way again.

God Bless all of you.

Alan

 

[D0UBTFIRE]

I am confused.
The Bible talks about a “sin unto death.”
The Bible in many places talks about the need to persevere to the end.

So yes, it is obvious that a person can be saved, and then later fall away from the faith and not be saved.

But this is the part that confuses me:

QUESTION: In the Catholic church, is “MORTAL SIN” the same as this “unforgiveable sin” that is mentioned in this passage?

***If ***it is the same, then it is unforgiveable.
If it is unforgiveable, then… it can’t be forgiven.
Right?
So… why does the Church say that it CAN be forgiven (by a priest, after confession and pennance) if it is unforgiveable?

I do not mean this question in order to engage in a debate with anyone. I mean… I am genuinely confused!

Can anyone clarify this for me?
Thanks very much, in advance.
—Idaho

My thoughts exactly. I’m confused too.

 

[Reynardus]

Forgive me if I’m muddling this thread.

If a mortal sin can’t be prayed for, how does it mesh with certain situations?

I’ve heard a story of a mother who prayed constantly and made sacrifices for her wayward son. The son abandoned his Faith, and probably broke every one of the ten commandments probably mortally, Then he was involved in an accident. On his deathbed, the mother’s prayer was answered because the son called for a priest with the latter saying he heard the most beautiful deathbed confession he ever heard in his whole life.

Our Lady also calls us to pray and make sacrifices for sinners in several apparitions. Surely these can’t be sinners who only sinned venially especially since she says there are many souls who go to Hell because very few people nowadays pray and sacrifice for others. If she calls us to such a thing,then does that mean one can indeed pray for sinners who sinned mortally?

 

[ncgolf]

Forgive me if I’m muddling this thread.

If a mortal sin can’t be prayed for, how does it mesh with certain situations?

I’ve heard a story of a mother who prayed constantly and made sacrifices for her wayward son. The son abandoned his Faith, and probably broke every one of the ten commandments probably mortally, Then he was involved in an accident. On his deathbed, the mother’s prayer was answered because the son called for a priest with the latter saying he heard the most beautiful deathbed confession he ever heard in his whole life.

Our Lady also calls us to pray and make sacrifices for sinners in several apparitions. Surely these can’t be sinners who only sinned venially especially since she says there are many souls who go to Hell because very few people nowadays pray and sacrifice for others. If she calls us to such a thing,then does that mean one can indeed pray for sinners who sinned mortally?

Probably the mother either prayed for a good death for her son or the conversion of her son. She most likely knew her son was in mortal sin and prayed that not only God would grant him the grace to reconcile himself but that the son act on the grace.

I imagine the Last Rites has saved many a soul.

 

[alanjeddy]

My thoughts exactly. I’m

confused too.

A person, through the Grace of God, is given a true Gift of the Holy Spirit and the person receiving it still denies it when in his heart he knows it to be a true and authentic manifistation of the Devine. It is a sin of despair when we believe that our sins are greater that God’s unending ocean of mercy. It is like slapping God in the face.

A mortal sin is an act that we do that has to be serious matter (breaking one of the 10 Commandements as an example) We have to have knowledge of it , and lastly give full consent of the will.

Hell does exist and in Matthew alone Jesus talks about it more than He does heaven. Why then don’t more Catholic priests talk about this hard issue?

 

[Atreyu]

One quick problem with your chosen interpretation: The Catholic Church states that all those who are born of God do commit mortal sin pretty regularly

No, the Catholic Church teaches nothing of the sort. No one on Earth knows how frequently mortal sins are committed. No one would even know how many mortal sins they themselves have committed. I would be surprised if a Catholic in good-standing would commit a mortal sin more than half a dozen times in a lifetime (this does not negate the need for frequent use of the Sacrament).

… lose their salvation, and must regain it through confession, some works, and maybe a few Hail Marys.

They lose “sanctifying grace”, which is normatively regained through the Sacrament of Reconciliation. The other things you mention are penances, which do not of themselves regain sanctifying grace. Rather, they remit some of the temporal punishments of the sins you have committed.

In the interpretation that you’ve presented, you’ve inserted “mortal sin” into a verse that says “anyone born of God does not commit [mortal sin].”

I didn’t insert it; the author at the link you supplied inserted it. He just didn’t call it “mortal sin”.

 

[Atreyu]

If a mortal sin can’t be prayed for, how does it mesh with certain situations?

John doesn’t say that you shouldn’t pray for mortal sins. He is “not saying that you should pray about that”, but he is also not saying that you should not pray about that.

I’ve heard a story of a mother who prayed constantly and made sacrifices for her wayward son. The son abandoned his Faith, and probably broke every one of the ten commandments probably mortally, Then he was involved in an accident. On his deathbed, the mother’s prayer was answered because the son called for a priest with the latter saying he heard the most beautiful deathbed confession he ever heard in his whole life.

Sounds like St Ambrose saying to St Monica that the child of so many tears would surely not perish. The child of course being St Augustine prior to his conversion.

Our Lady also calls us to pray and make sacrifices for sinners in several apparitions. Surely these can’t be sinners who only sinned venially especially since she says there are many souls who go to Hell because very few people nowadays pray and sacrifice for others. If she calls us to such a thing,then does that mean one can indeed pray for sinners who sinned mortally?

I think I erred in my attempt at a Catholic interpretation of the passage, especially when I said that a prayer for a person in mortal sin does absolutely nothing. It’s a difficult passage to understand, no? But it still clearly teaches the existence of mortal sin, and there’s no getting around that…

 

[mmmcounts]

I just disagree with one point of his. The verse says: “If anyone sees his brother commit a sin… I refer to those who whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death.” My interpretation necessitates that the “sin that leads to death” can be committed by a believer; a brother. And I find your link’s dismissal of this interpretation to be dissatisfying.

I don’t mind if it’s dissatisfying. I still think it’s right. No offense.

How can he say they weren’t believers to begin with? I don’t think the author has shown this (although I did only read what I thought were the relevant parts, so I might have missed it).

Yep, you missed it. 1 John 2:19 “These people left our churches, but they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left, it proved that they did not belong with us.” (In the commentary, these are the ones continually referred to as “the opponents” or “the ones who seceded.” They are mentioned in several other places in the chapters leading up to the one in question).

Many interpreters assume that a brother likewise could commit the “sin to death”
Thus the “sin resulting in death” is a sin committed not by believers but by unbelievers.

I agree with the underlined and disagree with the bold, and to me this is the crux of the whole issue.

I agree. That’s why I point out how just two verses later, John tells us the believer does not continue to sin because God keeps him safe. If the believer, as you claim, does continue to sin both in all the ways that do not lead to death and in the way(s?) that do lead to death, what could John possibly be talking about? I’ll try to keep my argument as simple as possible: By disagreeing with the bold statement, you make 1 John 5:18 very difficult to explain (to put it mildly). I really don’t feel that it can be explained within this context. (I’m not making it big to imply that I need to yell; it’s just for reference purposes so you can find it more easily).

Finally, you said:
“This verse tells us God protects His children; something the Catholic church regularly denies.”
Well that’s news to me! Who denies this? I think you should either back up this accusation or retract it.

Catholic Catechism, article 8. Do you realize that you, too, are allowed to disagree with contents of the Catechism if necessary?

No one on Earth knows how frequently mortal sins are committed. No one would even know how many mortal sins they themselves have committed. I would be surprised if a Catholic in good-standing would commit a mortal sin more than half a dozen times in a lifetime (this does not negate the need for frequent use of the Sacrament).

Even if it’s six, that’s still well over zero.

5:18 We know that everyone fathered by God does not sin, but God protects the one he has fathered and the evil one cannot touch him.

If “everyone fathered by God” commits every type of sin, exactly what does God protect them from?