Swazi King Rejects Pants: War on Terror Lost

[Shi Huangdi]

I'll give this one a bump

[Ben Kenobi]

the Popes own comission to study the issue, and had pathetic biblical justifcation.

Shi: Thanks for bumping this.

Agreed. There is not much biblical justification for banning contraceptives within a marriage. However, I do think that there are merits in the approach of natural family planning, especially in regards to the woman's own health. We are starting to see some of the side effects of contraceptives, and the toll that they take on women during longterm use.

Secondly, there should be more focussing on chastity, as people are looking for effective methods to avoid some of these situations altogether.

Christians do not reject sin at all, and instead act more evil then many non-believers do.

That calls into question the validity of their testimony. If you truly love someone you will do what they say.

Although we are able to obtain God's divine mercy,

without the Mercy of God we would be doomed.

We do not 'obtain' grace, grace is freely given by God. Since we are all sinners, and have fallen short, there is no way we can place God into our debt. God, in His mercy, has provided grace, and it is up to us to decide whether or not we want to accept God's grace.

"Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry, and feed you; or thirsty, and give you a drink? When did we see you as a stranger, and take you in; or naked, and clothe you?"



Not the passage I expected. You assume that how one acts has nothing to do with faith in God.

Look at v. 34:

"Take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the beginning of the world."

God's expecting the elect. What our good deeds do in Earth is to show how we feel about God. They are a reflection of our faith, that we love God, so we follow his command to love one another, as God loves us.

You are right, that when a person sins in Christ, to fellow Christians, and non-Christians, he casts doubts as to his own testimony and to the testimony of the others. If one brother can sin, what does this mean for the others? Scripture is very clear on this issue, that we are not to let sin slide, but to confront sin amongst the congregation.

we also have the ability to cut ourselves off from God.

Deep problem. Does 'cut ourselves off from God' equate with losing salvation? I can see ourselves losing some of God's blessings, when we stray, as a warning that we need correction. What I don't see is that someone who is saved, that they can lose salvation unless they recant their testimony. In that case, we would say they never truly accepted Christ in the first place.

It's a tremendous miracle, that even when we stray, God will always be with us, that he never abandons us regardless of what we do. God, having no need of man, in all his sinfulness, still loves us even when we sin. Like a true son, and not a false son, God also tries to correct us when we falter so that we might improve our state.

[Ben Kenobi]

"From all this Newman drew some shocking conclusions that have been reverberating in the church ever since: that there is in the body of the faithful (the laity) an "instinct" for the truth, that this "sense of the faithful" must never be ignored or taken for granted by the church's official teachers, that authentic church teaching therefore comes about through a kind of "conspiracy" or cooperative enterprise on the part of both laity and hierarchy, and finally that certain lapses (or "suspensions") can occur when one side or the other of this living body temporarily ceases to function."

Thank you very much Shi. I had no idea that this is what Newman taught.

[Shi Huangdi]

However, I do think that there are merits in the approach of natural family planning, especially in regards to the woman's own health. We are starting to see some of the side effects of contraceptives, and the toll that they take on women during longterm use.

Well, the study undertaken by the Church during Vatican II said otherwise, that trying to follow NFP was againt rhytyms or something like that and was a cause of unhapiness in the marrige. If contraception does have health problems though, I'll leave that for the doctors to declare.

We do not 'obtain' grace, grace is freely given by God. Since we are all sinners, and have fallen short, there is no way we can place God into our debt. God, in His mercy, has provided grace, and it is up to us to decide whether or not we want to accept God's grace.

Of course you are correct. But accepting his grace is more then just reciting: "I accept Jesus as my lord and savior". A true, loving, acceptance of Jesus means an effort to follow his teachings.

Not the passage I expected. You assume that how one acts has nothing to do with faith in God.

Not nessecarily. Someone with a strong Christian faith should certainly be driven to acts by their faith. But the two can be independent. Like I said, there are Christians who do bad things, and there are Christians who don't care for the least among us.

A good example of this would be the Pharisees of the Bible. They were the priests of their time and so I am sure they would say they are God's servants, but Jesus had a few choice words for them.


"

Deep problem. Does 'cut ourselves off from God' equate with losing salvation?"

Yes. If I were to say, commit a murder, than by that action I have chosen to reject God. I have done something so radically apart from what God wanted and from what his son taught that it can't really be said that I am accepting him or having a real faith in him. Of course, God is merciful and should I repent, I could be forgiven, but if I die in the state of rejection of God, I would go to the place where people who reject God go.

[Ben Kenobi]

A true, loving, acceptance of Jesus means an effort to follow his teachings.

Well said.

Yes. If I were to say, commit a murder, than by that action I have chosen to reject God. I have done something so radically apart from what God wanted and from what his son taught that it can't really be said that I am accepting him or having a real faith in him.

So why just murder? There are many other sins that can cut one off from God's blessings. Why does one need mortal sins apart from the rest?

[Shi Huangdi]

Well said.

Ah, maybe we aren't as far apart on this issue as I would have thought.

So why just murder? There are many other sins that can cut one off from God's blessings. Why does one need mortal sins apart from the rest?

Well according the Church magisterium's theory there are certain sins of particularly grave matter that destroys charity within you and those sins are mortal sins. I personally am rather skeptical of the Church here though, seeing as some of the Church's proclomations on what is a mortal sin are rather silly, for instance masturbation and missing mass intentionally are both listed as mortal sins by the Church.

I still haven't given up on the concept of mortal sin though. Of course, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, so none of us are perfect in following Christ, so I will leave it up to God to judge where the "line" would be where a persons actions reach a point where they demonstrate a rejection of God. I would only reccomend striving to follow Christ's teaching to put yourself as far away from the line as possible.

[Shi Huangdi]

Also, if you want scriptural support for the idea of distinction between mortal/non-mortal sin:

1 John 5:13-17

13 I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life. 14 And this is the confidence which we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. 15 And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him. 16 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

[Ben Kenobi]

Shi:

Sorry to delay, I've been quite busy today. Seems my life is just starting to get sorted.

16 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal

From the NIV:

Verses 16-17

"If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that."

Does 'mortal' equate with the sin that leads to death? What could Peter mean when he says, the sin that does not lead to death?

One intepretation of verse 17 is that Peter alludes to physical death. When a believer continues to sin in such a horrific manner, God, in judgment takes his life. There are numerous examples, both in the OT and the NT of God's judgement in this way.

According to Dr. Constable's summary on 1 John, he asserts:

"5:17 Because some sin does not lead to premature death we should pray for our brethren when they sin (cf. 1:9). Prayer for a sinning Christian is a concrete demonstration of love for that brother or sister (3:23).

These verses are not distinguishing between mortal (unpardonable) and venial (pardonable) sins as Roman Catholic theology uses these terms."

You have convinced me that God does distinguish between sins committed by a believer, but Constable seems to argue that the determination of which sins count where should be left to God to judge, and not to the Catholic church.

Thanks for the quotation, Shi!
You taught me more about Christianity.

[Ben Kenobi]

Bump for Shi.

[Shi Huangdi]

Ah, it's late. I personally agree it is up to God to judge where a person's sins cross over the line into non-acceptance of Jesus. The Church Magisterium's claim on it's ability to judge what is and isn't a mortal sin comes from a doctrine it hold known as Apostolic Sucsession, which is a whole another can of worms.

These verses are not distinguishing between mortal (unpardonable) and venial (pardonable) sins as Roman Catholic theology uses these terms."

Dr. Constable doesn't seem to understand Catholic theology. The Church doesn't teach any sin is unpardonable. Provide that we repent here on Earth, there is no mortal sin that the Church teaches cannot be absolved.

It is really late here and tommorow I might be able to clarify, but to clarify are you going with the interpretation that mortal sin reffered to in the passage I quoted mean causing physical death, not the loss of salvation? I'll get back to you tommorow.

[Ben Kenobi]

Dr. Constable doesn't seem to understand Catholic theology.

Yeah, I considered that after I posted. Point well taken.