Irish: Could, yes. Will? No, because God wouldn’t allow me to do it. His Holy Spirit, which resides in me, will not allow such a thing. I wouldn’t even want to try. I couldn’t contemplate me even wanting to. But, if all my sins are covered by the blood of Jesus, then ALL my sins are covered by the blood of Jesus. Every single one of them. Those I did, those I do now, and those I will do in the future.
Yes, that's a good way to put it. Well done. :)
Mark, from your above I infer that you think that if someone did all those things that he would be barred from Heaven, is that right? But, what if someone did all those things and then really repented and asked the forgiveness of a priest after convincing him that he was sincere? Wouldn't that person be just fine and saved in the Church's eyes at that point? I mean, at least until he committed the least mortal sin after that? IOW, are you saying that there is a "sin threshold" (not involving the Spirit) after which one crosses he cannot be saved no matter what a priest does on his behalf? I've never heard of that.
Irish, and Quix, and I are all saying that Christ died for all of our sins, past, present and future. That gives His death real meaning and worth. Consider these:
Luke 19:10 : For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."
1 Tim 1:15 : Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners — of whom I am the worst.
Now, these both say that Christ came to save, but did He really? We would say YES, that's exactly what He came to do, AND He did it! However, I think that your side doesn't see it that way at all. For you Christ actually saved no one, He only made it possible for men to cooperate and finish the job that Christ didn't/couldn't finish by saving themselves. Which victory for Christ has more meaning, the one where He does it all, or the one where He passes the buck? :)
***Mark, from your above I infer that you think that if someone did all those things that he would be barred from Heaven, is that right? But, what if someone did all those things and then really repented and asked the forgiveness of a priest after convincing him that he was sincere? Wouldn’t that person be just fine and saved in the Church’s eyes at that point? I mean, at least until he committed the least mortal sin after that? IOW, are you saying that there is a “sin threshold” (not involving the Spirit) after which one crosses he cannot be saved no matter what a priest does on his behalf? I’ve never heard of that.***
Ah, that is because I spoke incorrectly. Sinning without repentence bars one from Heaven (also a constant theme running the the NT). No man can save another, just as no man can damn another.
The priest does not save, nor does he damn. Only God judges; and He Judges by His Judgement on His rules.
***Irish, and Quix, and I are all saying that Christ died for all of our sins, past, present and future. That gives His death real meaning and worth.***
Christ died to destroy our soul’s death and rose again to restore our eternal life. That makes it possible for us to be saved. We could not otherwise.
In the Sermon on the Mount, we are instructed to do and are told what happens if we do not do - we are eternally punished in hell. The words of Jesus are plain and require little interpretation.
***Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners — of whom I am the worst.***
Yes. He came into the world to save sinners - to save all sinners - and there are going to be some that refuse to be saved.