Mortal sin

:confused:

steve

Re: Titus 3:4-11 taking this in pieces (all emphasis mine)

4 but when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,

“Washing of regeneration” & “renewal in the Holy Spirit” = Baptism
scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a1.htm#1215 refer to paragraph #1215 inside the link

6 which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.a]

steve

That’s still refering to the effects of baptism. As an aside, “might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life” is said that way because grave (as in mortal) sin can wipe out a person’s salvation.

8 The saying is sure. I desire you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to apply themselves to good deeds;**(“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=titus%203&version=RSVCE#fen-RSVCE-34090b”)] these are excellent and profitable to men. 9 But avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels over the law, for they are unprofitable and futile.

steve

Okay, Paul is talking to those who believe and what Paul insists they should do. But v 10, Paul introduces another person here.

10 As for a man who is factious ( αἱρετικὸν ), after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.

One can’t be a heretic unless they have been baptised. And as you can see, even one who has been baptised can be condemned.

And your point?

forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=11422544&postcount=208 scroll down the page till Heb 10 discussion

Hebrews 12:15-17 it’s an OT example of NT immorality and elimination from heaven. And in v 16 the Greek word for “immoral” is πόρνος

The same greek word is used in both readings. It’s διχοστασίαι . The word and understanding is clear.

11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

see Titus 3:5 above for the answer.

What point are you trying to make with baptism? If one dies in mortal sin, baptism won’t save them.

I am a little confused at this statement. The word “mortal” comes from the Latin word mors. The phrase “mortal death” means deathy death. I’m guessing you mean that St. John is speaking of sin unto physical death as opposed to spiritual death. I do not think this is a likely reading of the text. The passage is in the context of John’s discussion of salvation and eternal life (which, for our purposes,we might call “spiritual life”).

He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. (1 John 5:10-13)

This gives us good reason to suppose that the word “life” in v. 16 corresponds to spiritual life. It stands to reason that the death spoken of in v. 16 is therefore spiritual death.

I will admit that, in my view, the passage likely is not speaking simply of a mortal/venial sin distinction, but I think such a distinction is implicit in the text. My interpretation is that “sin unto death” refers to persistence in (mortal) sin till physical death, which consists of spiritual death in this life and leads to eternal spiritual death in the next life. Sin “not unto death” would then be either venial sin or mortal sin that is repented of. I do not suppose as some do that the statement “he shall give them life” means that they do not already possess life (and, therefore, must refer to a state of mortal sin). I interpret “life” here to refer primarily to our heavenly reward. We have our reward in this life in the sense that we have a claim to it, but we cannot lay hold of it until after we die. Of course, only those who possess spiritual life in this life will lay hold of eternal life in the next.

That’s my (disputable) take on this passage. The existence of a mortal/venial sin distinction is a necessary result of the fact that Christians can fall from grace through sin but not every single sinful act causes this. St. Thomas describes mortal sin as an act of the will directed toward something contrary to charity (love), turning man away from God. According to this definition, mortal sin is simply a willful violation of the Great Commandment (cf. Matthew 22:36-40).

You are correct, but you are overlooking a critical part of the passage. V. 29 reads, Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? Here, Paul is clearly speaking about someone who has been cleansed by the blood of Christ. Such a person who does not persevere in faith and charity to the end will be damned. This is such a clear passage that the most common Calvinist interpretation is that Paul is speaking about a hypothetical situation that is impossible because Calvinists believe that no one truly regenerate can fall from grace. Of course, such a manner of interpretation is dangerous in my opinion.

Protestants see all sin as being sin and separated by god,no matter what sin, you need a savior, in that way there the same.

If that were true of every sinful action (that is, all sin were mortal), then every time we sinned, we would separate ourselves from God. That’s a problem because Christians still sin!

The view you are expressing comes primarily from Romans 6:23: “The wages of sin is death,” but this does not mean that all sin is mortal. I could say, “the wages of gambling is poverty,” but that does not mean that every wager results in poverty. Some wagers result in hitting the jackpot. However, the rule of gambling is that we all lose in the long run. I’m not saying that we ever hit a jackpot with sin, but, in a similar way, we cannot say that every sinful act leads to spiritual death based on this verse. All sins might put us in danger of mortal sin, but they are not all mortal sins.

why than do not the ot death penalty sins, match the catholic mortal sins?.
forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?145200-responding-to-common-objections-to-bible-part-5&highlight=

There is a great degree of correspondence if you examine the Mosaic Law. Why are there differences? We are not under the Law of Moses, as it says in Galatians, so that Law is not the standard by which we are judged. Further, the dignity of the New Covenant surpasses that of the Old, and it promises a higher reward. It should be no surprise that it calls us to a higher standard than before. Thus the saying, “Ye have heard it said… But I say unto you…”

What he misses is

He doesn’t connect the sequence of events

[LIST]
*]neglecting to meet together on the “Day” (Sunday) is already a serious sin.
*]So IF one deliberately sins in this fashion after instruction not to, THEN
[LIST]
*]there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins for THEM
*]but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries awaits THEM
*]How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?
[/LIST]
[/LIST]All that happens for the one who deliberately neglects to meet together on Sunday and celebrate the Eucharist.

Because the sacrifice for sin, & blood of the covenant refers to words Jesus, the Son of God used in establishing the Eucharist. And (the Day) is Sunday, when they celebrate the Eucharist. And the one who deliberately neglects to meet on the Day (Sunday) sins big time.

Heb 10: (all emphasis mine)
23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. 26 For *if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?

He can’t connect all that being a Protestant.

I do agree that St. Paul probably has the mass in mind when he speaks about the “assembling of ourselves” based on the context, but the passage would make sense even without the existence of the mass. I do not agree with every point of your argument either. The “day” in mind here is evidently the day of judgment, not Sunday. Paul is not trying to demonstrate the necessity of attending Sunday mass. He is demonstrating the necessity of Christ’s sacrifice and the necessity of our fidelity in order to receive the fruits of that sacrifice.

I disagree about it making sense without the mass / Eucharist

Heb 10:25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day ( ἡμέραν ) drawing near.

**Q: **you agree that “meet together” is probably reference to the mass yet “the Day” is judgement day NOT Sunday?

Here’s why I don’t agree with that understanding of judgement day

[LIST]
*]Jesus said He didn’t know the time or day of judgement Day. So how are we to know?
*]in terms of the particular judgement, which is when each of us dies, do you know the day you will die?
*]so Not neglecting to meet as is the habit of some, makes zero sense in reference to Judgement Day.
*]Since we don’t know when judgement day is, neither the final judgement or particular judgement, we can’t encourage one another to meet on THAT day as if it is some voluntary event
[/LIST]open the link. The day ( [/FONT]ἡμέραν[FONT=Comic Sans MS] ) in that passage is any day of the week. In this case, the Eucharist was celebrated on Sunday.

So the “day” ( [/FONT]ἡμέραν[FONT=Comic Sans MS] ) = Sunday.

I disagree. The context screems the mass / Eucharist

That my friend is the Eucharist and our fidelity to receive the fruits of His sacrifice every mass.
forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=10796857&postcount=17

The day of judgment is fixed and we are steadily approaching it. St. Thomas Aquinas agrees with me that “the day” refers to the day of judgment.

Then (v. 25b) he gives the reason for this. For someone could say: Why should we make progress in the faith? Because a natural movement, the closer it gets to its goal, the more intense it becomes, whereas the opposite is true of a forced movement. But grace inclines in the manner of nature; therefore, he says, not neglecting, as some do, but encouraging; and this all the more as you see the day, i.e., the end, approaching: ‘The night is passed, and the day is at hand’ (Rom. 13:12); ‘The path of the just, as a shining light, goes forward and increases even to perfect day’ (Pr. 4:18).
-Commentary on Hebrews, 514

Even without the sacrifice of the mass, the passage still would make sense speaking only of Christ’s sacrifice because the mass is a symbol of Christ’s sacrifice.

I don’t think Aquinas would disagree with the following.

2178 (all emphasis mine)

This practice of the Christian assembly dates from the beginnings of the apostolic age. The Letter to the Hebrews reminds the faithful “not to neglect to meet together, as is the habit of some, but to encourage one another.” (encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near Hebrews 10:25)

Tradition preserves the memory of an ever-timely exhortation: Come to Church early, approach the Lord, and confess your sins, repent in prayer. . . . Be present at the sacred and divine liturgy, conclude its prayer and do not leave before the dismissal. . . . We have often said: “This day is given to you for prayer and rest. This is the **day **that the Lord has made, let us rejoice and be glad in it.”

What **day **is this?

I disagree,as saving physical life, is something important to do, something worth mentioning, if god was going to judge a person, than they should know how to avoid that [read jonah] nothing to do with salvation.

i am sorry that was very hard to understand, pleas type out anything of interest if you wish.

i meant catholic understanding of mortal sin.

well i cant complain much with what is said above. I am not 100% sure on the loss of salvation yet were i stand. The only thing i would disagree with is this

" My interpretation is that “sin unto death” refers to persistence in (mortal) sin till physical death, which consists of spiritual death in this life and leads to eternal spiritual death in the next life."

I dont think that physical death,automatically means spiritual death as well. But i am not saying that a sin or certain sins, could not hypothetical lead to both.

okay let’s try again

Please explain the underlined

Re: Titus 3:4-11 which is being referenced above, taking the passages in pieces (all emphasis mine). Let’s start with your comment they aren’t a “believer”.

looking at verses 4 & 10

v4
“but when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,”

The phrase “Washing of regeneration” & “renewal in the Holy Spirit” = Baptism
scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a1.htm#1215 refer to paragraph #1215 inside the link

So they ARE a believer, and they were regenerated, and renewed in the HS because of baptism

v10
“As for a man who is factious ( [FONT=Verdana]αρετικὸ****ν[/FONT] ), after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.”

Do you see the Greek word there? Open the link for the definition. One can’t be a heretic unless they are baptised. As you can see, one who has been baptised is condemned by God because of heresy if they die in heresy.

And your point re: v11?

Look at the following post. The NT sacrifice is effective to forgive sins, the OT sacrifice was never effective.
forums.catholic.com/showpost…&postcount=208 scroll down the page till Heb 10 discussion

look at the sin being identified in Hebrews v 16…

Hebrews 12:15-17 immorality eliminates one from heaven. In v 16 the Greek word for “immoral” is πόρνος

open the link for definition

Paul doesn’t talk or write to non believers. He writes to the Church. And believers most certainly can lose their salvation.

The same greek word is used in both readings. It’s διχοστασίαι . The word and understanding is clear. open the link

11 “And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and inthe Spirit of our God.”

Paul is talking about baptism. What’s your point? If one dies in mortal sin, baptism won’t save them.

If “the day” means Sunday, Paul id warning them to encourage one another to a greater degree as Sunday approaches, as if we should encourage each other less on Monday than on Saturday. It is more likely that he means that we ought to encourage each other more as the return of Christ approaches. For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head (Obadiah 1:15).

It’s not a big deal either way. I just that one is the more probable reading.

I would be content for now to demonstrate that there are sins which merit eternal punishment (i.e. hell) and sins which do not merit eternal punishment. This is sufficient to establish a division of mortal and venial sin, even if we do not yet agree on their exact nature.

You said, “I don’t think that physical death automatically means spiritual death as well.” I don’t think so either and I did not intend to say that. What I mean is that when we die, our wills our fixed forever either toward God or away from God. If we die in a state of spiritual death (i.e. mortal sin), we are stuck that way for eternity irrevocably. If we die in a state of spiritual life (i.e. what Catholics call sanctifying grace), then up to heaven we go. We can die in either state. I was defending the interpretation that John’s use of the words “life” and “death” in this passage refer to the soul and not to the body.

Sunday is when they celebrated the resurrection & the Eucharist. Some were deliberately neglecting to meet on Sunday. And we can see the consequences that brought on a person’e soul. Isn’t it great we have daily mass :cool:

The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist…right? :wink:

Between Saturday the Sabbath and Sunday the resurrection, they had 2 days of celebration. And with daily mass we have 7 days of celebration :extrahappy:

this will be my last post on this thread on this, i have much to learn before i even want to start discussing/debating.

Titus
v1-8 believers

v9-11 not, clear in context, a distinction made many times in pauls letters.
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus+3&version=NIV

1 Corinthians 6 9-11.
yes v11,always left out of catholic teachings

And that is what some of you were. **But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified **in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

ot.nt sacrifice
agreed 100%, but they were saved by looking to the nt sacrifice, the ot a type.

hebrews
i agree this is sin, hebrews 12 is speaking of avoiding that and any sin that would take our mind of jesus. I am not sure what this has to do with mortal sin or the catholic teachings on it.

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+12&version=NIV

galatians/romans
“Paul doesn’t talk or write to non believers”

as i said, in context his is writing** about non believers**, not to them. If you cant see that, than i think talk is pointless.

v11
they **were **sinners [adultery etc] but they were washed clean by jesus.

I would say all sin merits eternal punishment [Romans 6.23]. But can certain sins after salvation achieve the same thing? maybe, something i plan to look into more maybe with your help.

I agree with your second part wholly.

.

As I said previously, forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=11471640&postcount=30

“10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them.”

I explained

" v10
“As for a man who is factious ( [FONT=Verdana]αρετικὸ****ν[/FONT] ), after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.”

Do you see the Greek word there? Open the link for the definition. One can’t be a heretic unless they are baptised. As you can see, one who has been baptised is condemned by God because of heresy if they die in heresy. "

I was correct.

No it’s not.

True the grace of Baptism does all that for previous sin before baptism. After baptism, the sacrament doesn’t prevent one from losing sanctifying grace through mortal sin, nor does baptism automatically wash away future mortal sin after baptism. That requires the sacrament of reconcilliation

just “looking forward to the nt sacrifice” won’t do it. They needed to participate in that sacrifice every Sunday.

As I said previously

"Look at the following post. The NT sacrifice is effective to forgive sins, the OT sacrifice was never effective. forums.catholic.com/showpost…&postcount=208 scroll down the page till Heb 10 discussion "

As I said previously,

"look at the sin being identified in v 16…

Hebrews 12:15-17 immorality eliminates one from heaven. In v 16 the Greek word for “immoral” is πόρνος

open the link for definition."

The point is crystal clear.

Never said he did.

I said

"Paul doesn’t talk or write to non believers. He writes to the Church. And believers most certainly can lose their salvation.

The same greek word is used in both readings. It’s διχοστασίαι . The word and understanding is clear. open the link "

[LIST]
*]OSAS is anti biblical, if that’s the direction you’re going in.
*]Baptism washes away all past sins. It doesn’t automatically wash away future sins after baptism. Since baptism can only be given once, the ongoing sacrament of reconcilliation restores sanctifying grace lost through mortal sin, and washes away all mortal sins each and every time one avails themself of this sacrament…
*]if one doesn’t rid themselves of mortal sin on their soul before they die, then as Paul writes, “one will not inherit the kingdom of God” i.e. one goes to hell.
[/LIST]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.