What is a good Catholic response to this quote about sin an salvation?

[Norm_Hammond]

A good friend of mine states another’s quote (name of person being quoted withheld): “Nearly everyone defines sin as breaking a list rules. Jesus, shows us that a man who has violated virtually nothing on the list of moral misbehaviors can be every bit as spiritually lost as the profligate, immoral person. Why? Because sin is not just breaking the rules, it is putting yourself in the place of God as Savior, Lord and Judge.
There are two ways to be your own savior and lord; One is by breaking all the moral laws and setting your own course, and two by keeping all the moral laws and being very, very good. (Such as the rich young ruler).”

What should be the correct Catholic response to this?
Secondly, I’m not for certain myself what it is, but there seems to be something flawed about the quote or statement all together. It’s just not quite jumping out at me.

Thanks, Norm

 

[TRH1292]

Isaiah 5:20 “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil”

 

[PaulfromIowa]

The rich young man was hardly “very, very good,” he passed up a chance to be one of Jesus’ disciples. Salvation requires Faith, not just the avoidance of obvious sin.

Looking at him, Jesus felt a love for him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 22 But at these words [a]he was saddened, and he went away grieving, for he was one who owned much property.

23 And Jesus, looking around, *said to His disciples, “How hard it will be for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God!” 24 The disciples were amazed at His words. But Jesus *answered again and *said to them, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” 26 They were even more astonished and said to Him, “*Then who can be saved?” 27 Looking at them, Jesus said, “With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.”

 

[fhansen]

A good friend of mine states another’s quote (name of person being quoted withheld): “Nearly everyone defines sin as breaking a list rules. Jesus, shows us that a man who has violated virtually nothing on the list of moral misbehaviors can be every bit as spiritually lost as the profligate, immoral person. Why? Because sin is not just breaking the rules, it is putting yourself in the place of God as Savior, Lord and Judge.
There are two ways to be your own savior and lord; One is by breaking all the moral laws and setting your own course, and two by keeping all the moral laws and being very, very good. (Such as the rich young ruler).”

What should be the correct Catholic response to this?
Secondly, I’m not for certain myself what it is, but there seems to be something flawed about the quote or statement all together. It’s just not quite jumping out at me.

Thanks, Norm

The bible tells us that God judges by the heart, and that man judges by outward appearances. But by outward appearances the Pharisees may’ve been white as snow-and Jesus called them “white-washed tombs”-clean on the outside but full of all kinds of filth on the inside; hypocrites IOW. God wants our hearts changed first of all-then our behavior will follow suit, for the right reasons.

Being very, very good is, um, very, very good-so long as it’s done out of love, which is the only right way the law is fulfilled. Placing ourselves in the role of God is the* Original* Sin, and the one which all other sin flows from-the one that makes the others possible. But keeping the moral law is never wrong-its just ineffective at making us righteous-it cannot* justify* us- if observed strictly by our own efforts.

Man needs God, first of all: that’s the message of the New Covenant: “Apart from Me you can do nothing”, John 15. “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matt 19. Only as man comes into communion with God can he begin to obey for the right reasons. This is a relationship of love, which is why the greatest commandment is what it is. And this relationship* begins* with faith.

 

[tonyrey]

The mistake of the Pharisees was to equate “keeping all the moral** laws**” with “being very, very good” - a mistake Jesus that condemned in no uncertain terms.

 

[tonyrey]

The bible tells us that God judges by the heart, and that man judges by outward appearances. But by outward appearances the Pharisees may’ve been white as snow-and Jesus called them “white-washed tombs”-clean on the outside but full of all kinds of filth on the inside; hypocrites IOW. God wants our hearts changed first of all-then our behavior will follow suit, for the right reasons.

Being very, very good is, um, very, very good-so long as it’s done out of love, which is the only right way the law is fulfilled. Placing ourselves in the role of God is the* Original* Sin, and the one which all other sin flows from-the one that makes the others possible. But keeping the moral law is never wrong-its just ineffective at making us righteous-it cannot* justify* us- if observed strictly by our own efforts.

Man needs God, first of all: that’s the message of the New Covenant: “Apart from Me you can do nothing”, John 15. “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matt 19. Only as man comes into communion with God can he begin to obey for the right reasons. This is a relationship of love, which is why the greatest commandment is what it is. And this relationship* begins* with faith.

:clapping: Superb post - which makes mine superfluous!