If You Are Saved, Are Your Future Sins Forgiven?

10/28/07 | Pinochet

[pinochet]

I am a Catholic who is trying to understand Protestant history and teachings, in order to better understand the history of Christianity. There is one issue that I do not understand.

According to Protestant teachings, if a person becomes saved, are his future sins forgiven? Can a person lose his salvation? If not, can assurance of salvation become a license to sin?

If Ted Haggard had gone to be with the Lord early last year, while in the process of getting a "massage" from his male "friend", would he have gone straight to heaven?

[jo kus]

I agree that we remain sinners but what I’m trying to say is that the Holy Spirit works within us to sanctify us. It is more a matter of yielding to Him than a lot of effort on my part! That’s reassuring to me

Certainly. Although I would not classify us as "sinners" in the Biblical sense. That is reserved for a particular way of life that ignores God.

Regards

[jo kus]

Savedness is not proportional to sinlessness. There is no such thing as being saved again. The point of being saved is to forgive us of our sin, past, present and future. It is to forgive us of our condition. That doesn't and never promised to remove that condition.

Do you have any Scriptures to support that our future sins are forgiven already??? I believe the Scriptures have shown my point of view to be correct. The fact remains that in your scheme, a "saved" man who has become a lecherous adulterer is still a "slave to righteousness" rather than a slave to adultery?

Regards

[Quester]

How "saved" is a person who falls into serious sin? Are they not in need of being saved (forgiven of sins) again? Isn't the point of "being saved" to free us from sins and its slavery?

I would argue that the point of salvation is to give us life ... and to bring us into the fellowship of the family of God.

John 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

I don't think that you will find much scripture to support that 'freedom from sin' ... is the point of salvation.

But, of course, 'freedom from sin' is a part of the package because it is typical of the life that God's family members possess.

I only make this distinction ... because I believe that it affects the perspective.

God's main desire is not to fix us.

His main desire is for us, therefore ... He fixes us.

To achieve His goal of reclaiming us as His own, God must rebirth, recreate, and reform us. Such is the task (ours and Gods') of sanctification. Having brought us into His family, God proceeds to re-parent us ... so that we become the children He desires.

But God doesn't wait until we are perfect ... before He commits to relationship with us. As soon as we are willing, God brings us into relationship with Him, and commits Himself the accomplishment of our santification.

Philippians 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

So long as we desire to be with God (for God always desires to be with us) ... sanctification will succeed, no matter what the challenges.

How saved is someone who is stuck in the slavery of adultery?

Stuck ... ? Forever ... ?

Is anything too hard for God ?

[DungeonMaster]

Do you have any Scriptures to support that our future sins are forgiven already??? I believe the Scriptures have shown my point of view to be correct. The fact remains that in your scheme, a "saved" man who has become a lecherous adulterer is still a "slave to righteousness" rather than a slave to adultery?

1 cor, Paul criticized the church for not kicking out the guy that was sleeping with his father's wife. Paul never once questioned the guy's saved condition. Roman 7:18 - end of chapter shows that we will be sinners as long as we are breathing.

The fact remains that Christians become adulterers all the time, but they are still saved. Such is God's wonderful grace.

[jo kus]

I would argue that the point of salvation is to give us life ... and to bring us into the fellowship of the family of God.

Exactly. How much "life" do we have when a person is stuck in the slavery of sin?

I don't think that you will find much scripture to support that 'freedom from sin' ... is the point of salvation.

Freedom from the slavery of sin, vs. the slavery to righteousness, is Scritpural. Being freed from the slavery of sin is WHY Christ came, isn't it?

God's main desire is not to fix us... His main desire is for us, therefore ... He fixes us.

You lost me there.

But God doesn't wait until we are perfect ... before He commits to relationship with us.

Of course not. We are speaking of a "way of life", not absolute perfection. Are we a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness? We aren't speaking the extremes of either end of the spectrum.

I wrote: How saved is someone who is stuck in the slavery of adultery?

You responded: Stuck ... ? Forever ... ?

Naturally, that is the point I am making. We often must ask God for forgiveness and help in becoming free from the slavery of a sinful habit or way of life.

Regards

[jo kus]

1 cor, Paul criticized the church for not kicking out the guy that was sleeping with his father's wife. Paul never once questioned the guy's saved condition. Roman 7:18 - end of chapter shows that we will be sinners as long as we are breathing. The fact remains that Christians become adulterers all the time, but they are still saved. Such is God's wonderful grace.

Sorry, I don't see "future sins" as forgiven in these passages. First, Paul turned over the guy to satan for the express purpose of his returning to God in repentance. Secondly, Paul doesn't say we are "sinners" are entire life - but that men do sin and have recourse to ask God for forgiveness. Again, nothing about only once asking for forgiveness in our entire life.

Have you considered carefully examining the Lord's Prayer and one of the petitions in particular?

Regards

[DungeonMaster]

We’ve really exausted my desire to change your mind or prove what I believe. I’ve argued with Baptist friends about election vs free will. The argments lasted hours over a period of months and the conclusion was that we both left with the same opinion. At the rate you and I are going it would take years to cover as much ground and I already know the final outcome.

[jo kus]

At the rate you and I are going it would take years to cover as much ground and I already know the final outcome.

LOL! You are probably correct.

Regards

[GOPPachyderm]

Your suggestion to check out Romans 7 led to some interesting reading.
I read this at Bible Gateway commentary:

“Believers are delivered from that power of the law, which condemns for the sins committed by them. And they are delivered from that power of the law which stirs up and provokes the sin that dwells in them. Understand this is not of the law as a rule, but as a covenant of works... we are under a covenant of grace, and not under a covenant of works; under the gospel of Christ, not under the law of Moses. The difference is spoken of under the similitude or figure of being married to a new husband. The second marriage is to Christ. By death we are freed from obligation to the law as a covenant, as the wife is from her vows to her husband. In our believing powerfully and effectually, we are dead to the law,
and have no more to do with it than the dead servant, who is freed from his master, has to do with his master’s yoke.”

What do you make of this explanation?

[jo kus]

Believers are delivered from that power of the law, which condemns for the sins committed by them.

We, as believers of Christ, are no longer under a system of the law, but rather, a system of grace. Rather than following the letter of the law and every bit of it, we are bound to the law of love. I compare this to the legal system to the relationship between father and child. In the later "system", the child is loved even if the child does not perfectly fulfil the wishes of the father. In the former, the law condemns in a legal manner by breaking one of the commandments. As children, we are not condemned - grace is merciful and will forgive sin that is committed.

we are under a covenant of grace, and not under a covenant of works;

To be honest, I don't think that the Jews believed they lived under a "covenant of works". They knew that God was responsible for the will to act in His name. I think the Jews, rather, were more likely to try to fufill the law so as to earn God's love, and to fulfill it "perfectly" so as to win salvation from Him. Perfect fulfillment was just not possible, as Paul noted, nor was it necessary, now that we are to be judged as children, rather than legally.

We are bound to Christ's Law, which FULFILLS the Mosaic Law, goes BEYOND it. But we are not expected to perfectly follow it - God views us under a system of grace because of Jesus Christ, and thus, He will forgive us when we cry out to Him.

Regards

[ears_to_hear]

Yes, all of my sins are forgiven, past , present and future.

Remember when Jesus hung on the cross and declared it finished ALL OF MY SIN was future :)

[Seven_0]

Not necessarily - I hadn't narrowed it down to that. Anyone who has sexual relationships with someone, and one of the two are married. Is such a person "saved" from the slavery of adultery, even if they, say, 10 years ago, declared Jesus as Lord and savior and had sins forgiven of them??

When someone divorces and remarries, is it still adultry after 10 years?

[jo kus]

When someone divorces and remarries, is it still adultry after 10 years?

This is a bit off topic, don't you think? I am speaking of someone bound by the slavery of the sin of adultery, not an ecclesiastical question that occurs ten years after a divorce.

Regards

[Seven_0]

This is a bit off topic, don't you think? I am speaking of someone bound by the slavery of the sin of adultery, not an ecclesiastical question that occurs ten years after a divorce.

I am not seeing the difference. Isn't marriage binding?

[jo kus]

I am not seeing the difference. Isn't marriage binding?

Of course it is binding. Marriage is the joining to one flesh, by God. My distinction is not about a person who unknowingly "commits adultery" by marrying someone 10 years after divorcing someone else, but rather, about a person in an active relationship where the two still consider each other married. While the Church may consider a couple married, many people do not agree with that stance. Thus, I don't classify such an "adulterous affair" in the same category as someone who actively and knowingly sleeps with another person while still proclaiming their "love" to another person. The later would be a slavery to sin. The feelings going through such a person's head is much different than the example you bring up.

Regards

[Seven_0]

Of course it is binding. Marriage is the joining to one flesh, by God. My distinction is not about a person who unknowingly "commits adultery" by marrying someone 10 years after divorcing someone else, but rather, ...

Matt 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

It seems to me that “whosoever shall marry her that is divorced” is bound into a relationship that is continuously adultery, even after ten years.

Seven

[Cvengr]

bttt

[jo kus]

It seems to me that “whosoever shall marry her that is divorced” is bound into a relationship that is continuously adultery, even after ten years.

Many people living in such relationships don't even realize that the Church considers there relationship "adulterous". I am speaking about a person who willfully is committing adultery. I am not speaking about ecclesiastical questions, but the person who knows they are commiting adultery. That is a slavery to the sin of adultery. A person who marries someone, not realizing that the Church considers their relationship "adulterous", is not in the same position as one who cheats on their spouse.

Regards

[Seven_0]

Many people living in such relationships don't even realize that the Church considers there relationship "adulterous".

Why? The church doesn’t keep it secret. Can you imagine someone standing before God at the judgment saying, “I didn’t know that I was sinning?”

A person who marries someone, not realizing that the Church considers their relationship "adulterous", is not in the same position as one who cheats on their spouse.

In both cases, the wages of sin is death. I know that you have said on this thread that you see no good evidence for the OSAS doctrine. Perhaps this is why you have different categories of sins. I see much support for both sides of the debate; that is why the debate will continue. There are so many scriptures to consider that I am happy to debate either side. I am leaning toward the OSAS side.

I am painfully aware of the fact that when I judge others, I condemn myself. Still I will take a stand on adultery.

Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

Considering this verse, what do you think will happen to a person that accuses someone of losing his salvation? I have come to the conclusion that if it is possible to lose salvation, that no one is good enough to keep it, especially me.

Seven

[jo kus]

The church doesn’t keep it secret. Can you imagine someone standing before God at the judgment saying, “I didn’t know that I was sinning?”

First, everyone doesn't "know" the Church's teachings on such things. Which "marriages" require an annulment is even confusing to me sometimes, and I am supposed to know this stuff... I doubt many people pick up the Code of Canon Law and read the chapter on marriages at the beginning or the end of such a relationship.

Also, regarding "unknown sins", I think you will find support for the concept. The OT especially has verses that ask God to forgive us of sins we may have commited but were unaware of them. I do not believe that sins commited ignorantly are as dangerous to the soul as the willful sins. Hebrews 10, for example, discusses willful sins, not sins in general commited out of ignorance. It is the rejection of God that locks us out of heaven, not following a rule book we may not be aware of.

I am painfully aware of the fact that when I judge others, I condemn myself. Still I will take a stand on adultery.

Well, I appreciate that stand. However, being in a position to see people on a real life basis in these situations (a person who married someone who has not had their last relationship annuled), I have a harder time "condemning" them. They truly were acting in good will when they married civilly. They love their wife/husband and have a good relationship. It is difficult for me to "condemn" someone because their spouse's previous relationship was not officially annuled by the Church. How am I as an RCIA instructor supposed to slam the door in people's faces because of that? It is very hard, to judge others based on their ignorance of Canon Law, when they are actively seeking God and desiring to become Catholic. These things are delicate subjects, and as such, I have a harder time making such decisions that are not so black and white. Naturally, we do not accuse them of adultery!

Considering this verse, what do you think will happen to a person that accuses someone of losing his salvation?

I think Paul is refering to the Gentile who has a general tendency to sin, not a good person who ignorantly breaks ecclesiastical rules. I think we can determine the wicked from the decent person. The context of the verse (Romans 2:1) is written towards the Jew/Christian who is proud of their religiousity, while they do the very same things that the pagans do.

Regards