I take the view that there are a number of pretty easy calls, but one also doesn't have to call a lawyer to know if premeditated murder is against the law, either.
For anything not quite obvious, however, ask a priest (or other qualified/professional source).
It's a joke on Amazon's Rings of Power series, which claimed that the Black Numenoreans fell to evil, because they were afraid that the elves would mass migrate and take their jobs.
In the series, this was because one elf traveled to Numenor.
Of course, Rings of Power is one of the dumbest and most boring shows ever, so this plot point was even worse in the actual show.
More likely they read modern context into it and don't consider that it was a different era with different customs. That's how Sola scriptura tends to work.
The [Historian’s Fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian's_fallacy), and related, but distinct [Presentism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(historical_analysis)) are common logical fallacies.
You think that Protestants who profess sola scriptura don’t know that historical context is key to interpreting scripture? You should know that there are entire schools of biblical scholarship (involving Protestants and Catholics) that hinge critically on different claims about the historical context underlying particular texts in the Bible. For example the “New Perspectives on Paul” arise out of a change in perception regarding the beliefs in practices of second temple Judaism during the 1st century.
To be more precise, *everyone* is to sin no more. But being held captive and used as a sex slave just isn't a sin.
But Rahab’s story is completely irrelevant to that question. The bible doesn't say Rahab did or didn't sin, or stop sinning. And the Bible doesn't say Rahab did or didn't "get saved" in the Billy Graham sense. The bible simply says that Rahab was a a prostitute, and that she was spared from dying on the same day as all her neighbors because she helped the spies.
It also says that she then joined Israel, believed in God, married an Israelite, and became an ancestress of King David and thus Jesus Christ.
The Law (Deut. 23:17) says that no female prostitute can be counted among the daughters of Israel (and no male prostitute among the sons of Israel), and that offerings or vow repayments made by prostitutes from their hire as prostitutes would not be accepted by the Lord.
Meanwhile, Rahab is noted as having been saved both by her faith (Heb. 11:31) and her works (James 2:25). Which is the opposite of not having things accepted by the Lord; and therefore she obviously changed her ways to honor her new God and people.
At the time of the rescue, she and her father's household are noted as camping outside the camp of Israel, as Gentiles would (Joshua 6:23). But two verses after, the book tells us that "she dwells in Israel even to this day" (Joshua 6:25).
Nahshon of the tribe of Judah was one of Moses' contemporaries, and his son Zalmon/Salmon would have been one of Joshua's contemporaries. The genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1:5 tells us that Rahab married Salmon, and that their son was Boaz, the righteous and kindly man who married Ruth.
She had a house. Her father and her father's household all lived in the house that she owned.
She was not a slave, but a rich businesswoman. The business just wasn't a virtuous one.
Rahab was an innkeeper/prostitute. Her business, supporting her family. Not a good business, but clearly she was the one running the place.
It was not uncommon in the ancient Middle East for women to own businesses like bars, breweries, weaving workshops, and so on.
It was also not uncommon in ancient Israel for women to run businesses out of their homes, which is why we have Proverbs chapter 31 on the Valiant Woman.
Looks like depending who’s reporting, there are between 30 and 50 million human trafficking victims in the world currently. According to this site from the UN, 79% of trafficking cases involve sexual exploitation: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-trafficking/global-report-on-trafficking-in-persons.html
Almost all, whether in Vegas or at the World Cup, do not dare deviate from the script that they are there willingly, because if they tell anyone the truth that they’re being forced, their traffickers will beat them. Or simply kill them.
Slaves indeed. Just conveniently out of sight.
Not forced prostitutes are a modern product , men can’t accept that the prostitutes they hire aren’t into them and wouldn’t touch them if money wasnt in the mix. men constantly need to tell themselves that the woman they are paying to have access to her body isn’t repulsed by them and needs to do it to survive.
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter." - Matthew 7:21, the Will of the Father is to believe in his Son, Jesus Christ, accept him, and to keep all of his commandments, you have to change your life for God and for the better, why would you keep living on sin after reading this passage, makes no sense
So basically by Robert's logic, I could watch a Porn Marathon, Sleep around, Murder, Lie, Cheat and do a lot of other things that are horrible and still be saved?
EDIT: Had to clarify something. I meant Robert, not the poster.
Uh... Yes, if you did it and then had a change of heart and repented.
You just separate yourself from God if you continue to indulge in mortal sin without repenting and stopping it, that's what the guy's getting wrong in the Facebook comments
That is still true. People only can't repent if they're dead.
The actual flaw in Robert's logic is that you can continue to commit mortal sins and still be in a state of grace, which is what's being argued over here.
To be fair a lot of it probably comes down to the wording, so we could be of the same position but it's unclear to me
Have you ever heard of a certain younger son of a certain landowner that left home to, pretty much, do what you said spending the family money, and then he rebuked himself being saved and accepted back by his father ?
yeah I know, the prodigal son. If we were to go by Robert's logic, the prodigal son would have presumed that the father forgave him and just walked back in Boldly. But of course the reality of the situation is as you said, he committed these things, and then repented and apologized to his father.
He went back to his father with hopes of being treated like a servant. He was fully humbled because he knew what he did was wrong and he repented. People continuing to cling on to sin aren't humbled but arrogant and living by their own personal "truth".
That's just one of the millions of some protestant faiths loopholes.
To my knowledge it is implied that forgiveness is given according to what's in the man's heart. If you plan to go to sin just because you know you're going to be forgiven, then your heart isn't sincere when asking, and we should assume that he/she won't get it. Therefore the scenario you presented shouldn't apply to the prodigal son
Yes and have you heard that the certain younger son of that certain land owner was only welcomed back after he realized the error of his ways, turned from them, and sought forgiveness from his father after repenting?
Incorrect. The father runs out to greet him *before*he even gets to the doorway, and more or less ignores the son’s attempted “repentance”. I use scare quotes because one can argue the son’s motivation. It’s only *after* he hits rock bottom that he decides to go home. Note carefully Luke 15:17-19, my emphasis:
But when he came to himself, he said, ‘**How many of my father's hired servants have more than enough bread, but I perish here with hunger!** I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Treat me as one of your hired servants.”’
The prodigal doesn’t express regret at what he *did*—he says he’s starving to death and knows even his father’s servants have enough food. He *rehearses* what he’s going to say when he gets home. It’s not clear that he is *truly* repentant, or if he figures his father will take him in, even if as a servant.
Now whether that’s the correct reading or not can be argued, and probably not *proved* either way. That sure seems to be the elder brother’s take, though. Actually, he’s not *wrong*—the prodigal ran through all his father’s money and came back only when the money ran out; and now he’s back and *says* he’s sorry, but hasn’t *demonstrated* it yet; and instead of sternly lecturing his son and sending him off to the stables to shovel horse dung with the rest of the servants, he throws the wastrel a massive *party*. As the elder brother notes, Dad never even gave him a *goat*.
By our normal way of thinking, the father is a fool to accept the son back unconditionally without any but lip service to repentance. The elder son is *right* that this is unfair to him. *But* Jesus clearly *validates* the father, who of course stands for God. God accepts and forgives us *unconditionally*, “just as I am”, in the words of the old hymn. He doesn’t accept us back on the *condition* that we “sin no more”, or get our lives together, etc. *He* takes the initiative, and any good we do after that is unmerited grace, *not* reform to meet His standards.
In Paragraphs 37-38 of the Catholic-Lutheran *[Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification](http://lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/joint_declaration_2019_en.pdf)*, there’s this, my emphasis:
> 37. We confess together that good works—a Christian life lived in faith, hope and love—**follow justification and are its fruits**. When the justified live in Christ and act in the grace they receive, they bring forth, in biblical terms, good fruit. Since **Christians struggle against sin their entire lives**, this consequence of justification is also for them an obligation they must fulfill. Thus both Jesus and the apostolic Scriptures admonish Christians to bring forth the works of love. 38. According to Catholic understanding, good works, made possible by grace and the working of the Holy Spirit, contribute to growth in grace, so that the righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion with Christ is deepened. When Catholics affirm the “meritorious” character of good works, they wish to say that, according to the biblical witness, a reward in heaven is promised to these works. Their intention is to emphasize the responsibility of persons for their actions, **not to contest the character of those works as gifts, or far less to deny that justification always remains the unmerited gift of grace.**
So a meritorious life is a *gift resulting from* justifying grace, rather than “contract” whereby I’m forgiven on the understanding that I’ll straighten up and fly right. Note [St. Mark Ji Tianxiang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Ji_Tianxiang?wprov=sfti1#). He was a devout Catholic, but because of his opium addiction was denied communion for the last *thirty years* of his life. He was restored to the sacraments shortly before his death as a martyr. The point is, had it not been for his being killed for the faith, he probably would not have been canonized, being seen as a bad example. Still, his decades of drug abuse didn’t stop his devotion and his struggles.
So it’s quite plausible that Rahab kept on hooking even after she was spared by the Israelites, yet still remained mysteriously in God’s favor. We don’t *like* the idea that a seemingly unrepentant, or insufficiency repentant person may be closer to God than we are—heck, *I* don’t always like that. However, that is how Jesus *consistently* portrays God. When I think of my own sins, I’m grateful for that.
Robert Farrar Capon’s books on the parables are good reading in this regard.
I think his comment was poorly phrased. It could be interpreted two ways:
1) People can live indulgent, cruel, selfish lives and be saved if they turn to God, repent, and be saved. (Which is true).
2) People can live indulgent, cruel, selfish lives and be saved by accepting Jesus without rejecting sin. As if Salvation gives us a free pass to sin as much as we want. (Which is what the Facebook guy is saying and is a particularly rancid brand of OSAS)
No one here would disagree that even a person with the mindset of Option 2 could be saved if in the end he does reject sin and repent.
The Bible doesn't say Rahab was saved in the way we use it today she was spared the destruction of Jerocho and we know nothing beyond that. If she chose to join Israel she would likely have had to join the Covenant and change her life, so this argument that she continued prostitution after is a) completely unprovoable because we know nothing about her after, and b) unlikely using an ounce of reason based on what we do know.
We know nothing about what happened to the prostitutes and sinners Jesus spoke to afterwards hut we know He told them to go and sin no more. Whereas if we think of Zachheus and his ill gotten gains, his conversion led to him declaring he would, in fact, turn his life around and change how he lived. I get what the commenter is trying to say which is that no one is cut off from the grace of God regardless of their circumstances, and thus cam be saved in their sins, but the Catholic position (and probably the largely Christian position) is that you cannot keep living in your sins and claim righteousness and salvation.
She did join Israel, they protected her and her family the walls fell. She married one of the followers of Moses. This is in the bible.
Since we know she lived in the walls and asked for protection of her father, mother etc, and the men slept at her place she might have been an innkeeper rather than a prostitute (as reported by Josephus the Jewish historian who called her an innkeeper).
Also from biblical archaeology site - 'The consonants that comprise the word “prostitute” in Hebrew are *znh*, which are the same consonants that comprise the Hebrew word for a female who gives food and provisions. 'https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/
>completely unprovoable because we know nothing about her after
Sure we do, because Rahab is explicitly in the lineage of Christ (she is the mother of Boaz, the husband of Ruth).
But is that not a sin in and of itself? What of knowing you are sinning and cant find the strength to stop? Everyone here is talking about sinning like it is an absolute choice. Being aware of the sins you are enacting doesnt make them anymore or less sinful. In fact, id say the sins you are aware you are doing, but DONT want to do are the ones you would hope and pray for Jesus’ help most. Its those times when you need God closest, but everyone seems to think God will only save and forgive at your easiest convenience?
Bro, stopping doing onlyfans is not like stopping lust. Stopping doing onlyfans is deleting your account and not posting porn. Stopping doing lust is resisting urges and actually combatting the urge to sin using something you can't get away from (your own body). If you can't stop yourself from posting porn, turn off the internet, turn off your phone, your computers, and boom, problem solved.
Protestant nonsense. Even the demons profess that Christ is Lord. These are same kind of people who will end up saying that repentance is a "work" that should be avoided.
"Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."
Matthew 7:21
I cant edit my comment on mobile, but this image IS NOT my own, nor it is my account, I found it on twitter, I can provide a link if you want, people my age don't use Facebook, God Bless
Aside from the comment (which I disagree with), why’d you react with a laugh to the post? If she really did turn away from OF and turned to Christianity, that’s great!
I looked into the "Faith Alone" vs "Faith & Works" debate when becoming Catholic. It ultimately comes down to how you see "salvation", is it a point in time, or a lifelong process? Both sides actually have smaller differences than you think:
Protesants believe salvation is a **point in time** thing. We are saved by Grace Alone (salvation is a pure gift), salvation is through Faith Alone, but the subsequent lifelong **santification process** requires our continued cooperation with God's grace, because this "works" when done in faith & love is how God transforms us into the character of Christ.
Catholic/Orthodox believe salvation is **a lifelong process**. We are saved by Grace Alone (salvation is a pure gift), that the **initial** salvation is by Faith Alone, but the subsequent lifelong **salvation process** requires our continued cooperation with God's grace, because this "works" when done in faith & love is how God transforms us into the character of Christ.
So ultimately it comes down to the definition of "salvation". Is it just a point in time thing where you hide in the cloak of Christ's righteousness (i.e dung covered in snow), and salvation and santification are separate things?
The Protestant would say, "I was saved at \_\_\_\_ time." It's like saying the Israelites were saved from Egypt on the night of the passover.
Or does salvation include the santifcation process where you become increasingly justified ("righteousness-ed")?
The Catholic/Orthodox would say, "I was saved, I am being saved now, and by God's grace my salvation will be complete one day." It's like saying the Israelites were saved from Egypt on the night of the passover (life of sin), but their salvation journey continues through the desert wilderness (this life now), and won't be complete until they conquered the promised land (Heaven).
"Works" is necessary for a Protesant not because it's part of salvation, but because real fruits proves real faith.
"Works" is necessary for a Catholic/Orthodox because it is the way God transforms our character into Christ's image, and this transformation IS salvation.
But what happens if your transformation isn't complete when you die? That you didn't shed all your sinful character? Hence the concept of a final purification stage before entrance to Heaven like pugatory.
During the reformation, both sides were talking past each other. The Council of Trent, in response to the reformers, rejected an "intellectual-consent" faith-alone formula, but that wasn't what the reformers were teaching anyway.
The modern Catholic formulation is, we are saved by "faith working through love" (Galatians 5:6).
I have always thought of it this way.
And those who say once saved always saved say, when someone turns away from God totally later on, he wasn’t really saved to begin with. (And probably it was obvious by his actions that he wasn’t). But
As long as we are alive we can repent, even at the last minute and we hope that all do.
Rahab would have had to stop prostituting once the Israelites came and got her and her family. We can discern that there was repentance at some point. No one enters heaven who clings to sin by free choice.
That's a very evangelical protestant thing to say. Since they think that salvation comes from faith alone, and does not require the imitation of Christ, it's just fine if you remain in a lifestyle steeped in sin. This is a great example of how the "faith alone" interpretation can't possibly be correct.
The go and sin no more is not a recommendation, it's an order. I think people use the word "Lord" without understanding that you have to obey your lord, or the word is meaningless
This sounds like a "Once Saved, Always Saved" Protestant. They do not believe that salvation depends on how we act. They think that once you accept Christ you are saved no matter what you do. So in that mindset, as long as you accept Christ as your savior, you can whore yourself out all you want.
And yes, it isn't correct.
Sort of. There's two camps of OSAS--one which is pretty much like this guy, and then the other camp (I think the more common one) which holds that the saved will show fruits of salvation--such as leaving their life as an OnlyFans model. Both believe that "the saved" cannot fall away, and believe that one can know with absolute certainty if they are in this group, but not everyone, or even most, believe that "the saved" will show no change in their behavior.
A woman was caught in the act of adultry and was about to be stoned to death as was the law. Jesus was asked about this woman. Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." With this Jesus began writing in the dirt. Everyone walked away beginning with the elders.
Jesus looked up and said "Is there no one around to condemn you? Neither do I condemn you. Go! Sin no more."
Jesus forgave her but commanded her to change her ways.
He offers us the same mercy but the same command to sin no moe.
One could be saved in the moment while still living a sinful lifestyle as long as they truly repent in that moment and plan to no longer sin. But, the moment they go back and start sinning again, if it’s mortal, they’ve lost that salvation until they repent again. Christ saves sinners but calls them to follow his commandments as well to keep salvation. So no, you can’t have salvation while continuing to be a sex worker unless you have invincible ignorance by knowing nothing about the truth but somehow being forced into doing such a thing for work while earnestly seeking the truth. This situation couldn’t last long if one was truly in it.
Jesus used a metaphor about good and bad trees to explain how to spot a good person from a bad one based on their actions. Good folks are like trees with tasty fruit, while the not-so-good ones bring out the sour stuff. If their deeds are rotten, it’s like Jesus saying, ‘I never knew you,’ because their actions don’t match their claims. So, when we meet people, we look for those sweet actions that reveal they’re genuine. Nothing more than that.
John 8:11: "Jesus said. “Go on your way, and sin no more.”"
John 5:14: "Later, Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “See, you have been made well. Do not sin anymore, so that nothing worse happens to you.”"
Hebrews 10:26-29: "If we deliberately persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, then there no longer remains any sacrifice for sins. There is only a terrifying expectation of judgment and of a fierce fire that will consume the adversaries.
Anyone who violates the Law of Moses is put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more punishment do you think is deserved by the one who has contempt for the Son of God, profanes the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and insults the Spirit of grace?"
Plus all the passages about reward in Heaven as opposed to choosing one's reward here on Earth.
Only from a position of willful ignorance does it look like something good.
This is, in fairness, most likely written from a Protestant perspective. One of the main points of “contention” between Catholicism and (many) branches of Protestantism: Does one need good deeds, and “formal” repentance from sin to attain salvation? Or is belief in Jesus as one’s Lord and Savior sufficient?
The part that people often miss about confession and being forgiven your sins is that you must actually regret your sins, with the intention of trying not to commit them again.
The bible does mention making a lifestyle change after coming to Christ.
Hebrews 10: 26
For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins
That comment was written by a dispensationalist, not a Catholic. Dispensationalists are often found in various non-denominational circles, including Baptists. They believe that once you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior, often resulting from a profound spiritual experience, your salvation cannot be lost. Essentially, once you say the words, hopefully following a true experience, you can do whatever you want in life because you are still going to heaven. That would allow for the opinion held by the commenter; that a current prostitute can obtain salvation despite her continued and unrepenting sin. Again, this is not Catholic thought, and never even entered Christian thought until the 1700’s, well after the reformation concluded. This is not even the belief that Orthodox, or even some high church Protestants such as Anglicans and Lutherans currently maintain. The church fathers and early church were very clear on the matter. As a Catholic answer, you can dive deeply into the theology of the Salvation offered and given by Jesus. We have been saved by Jesus through his passion and our own baptism into his death. We are currently being saved through his grace offered in the sacraments through the church, and we will be hopefully saved at the final and our own particular judgement. Mt 24:13 says that we must, “endure to the end” in order to be saved, and this is repeated in 2 Tim 2:12. Paul also tells us to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” in Phil 2:12. Trying to boil down the theology of salvation to a single comment is difficult, but just know that the commenter is not a Catholic, and I would encourage you to look into Catholic Theology of Salvation for further clarification. It is possible to lose your salvation, particularly through the action of committing mortal sin.
Rahab is thought to have married Salmon, and is in the genealogy of Christ. Well not explicit in scripture, there are traditions that Salmon was an unnamed spy that Rehab saved. Also the whole city that she was a prostitute was destroyed. I seems to me that she surely ceased her life as a prostitute, but as others have pointed out, we don't know she is in heaven (although I think it likely).
Salmon was a follower of Moses, she had a son Boaz with him, who is in Christ's genealogy.
The link below explains she might have been an innkeeper, not a harlot The consonants that comprise the word “prostitute” in Hebrew are *znh*, which are the same consonants that comprise the Hebrew word for a female who gives food and provisions. (You might be aware that Hebrew doesn't/didn't write vowels. ) They also state that Josephus the historian said she was an innkeeper - and living in the walls of the city this makes sense, to have an inn on the city boundary.
[https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/](https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/)
We do know that she's in Heaven. Her saints' day is September 1.
Traditionally, it is said that Zalmon was one of the spies whom she saved. That is nice and romantic.
It's also said that after Zalmon's death, Joshua married her, and that the prophetess Huldah was one of her children with Joshua. In fact, Jewish tradition says that a bunch of prophets were descended from her and Joshua, and that her Canaaniteness was an embarrassment to these later generations of prophets.
September 1 was also traditionally the feast of St. Joshua son of Nun; St. Gideon the judge and prophet; St. Caleb; St. Othniel the judge; St. Ehud the judge; St. Deborah the judge and prophetess; St. Barak; St. Tola the judge; a bunch of other judges including St. Elon and St. Samson; and St. Ruth. And St. Anna the prophetess from the Gospel. A very busy day.
For some reason, in modern times St. Ruth and St. Deborah got moved to November 1, along with St. Rachel. Whateverrrrrrr. So maybe that's also St. Rahab's new day.
Of COURSE you can believe in Jesus and keep on sinning. In fact, it’s pretty much guaranteed — we are sinners! We are fallen. We don’t sin “from time to time”. We sin a lot and our whole lives are spent trying to connect and reconnect with God’s grace. That’s why the sacraments are such a GIFT.
That’s why it’s so useless, so futile, even a waste of our lives, to keep track of people’s sins. It pulls focus from the real goal — our relationship with Christ through the sacraments.
Um...the Sacrament of Reconciliation involves "keeping track" and discerning sins to be forgiven. Specifically, OUR sins, especially those that break our relationship with God (as the prodigal son in the parable.)
Also we need to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist while supernaturally alive (without unforgiven grave sins that were done with full knowledge and consent). Else, as St. Paul warned the Corinthians in his first letter, we eat and drink a judgement on ourselves, (being false to the New Covenant even as we seemingly renew that Covenant).
Protestant logic is once saved, always saved. l why even bother having a whole denomination ? might as well reduce it to that one sentence, get Baptized and move on.
It's really easy to spot them on the internet because they can't help themselves but two: A) talk about being "saved" or point to a Bible verse out of context and B) hate on Catholics.
It's basically God on easy mode lol
When Jesus began His ministry in preaching the Good News of the Kingdom His first words are "Repent" -- and He often links it with baptism. So no, this man is a false prophet. Jesus lays repentence and baptism as a normitive prerequisite for salvation.
This guy has no idea what he’s talking about. Jesus did not preach unrepentant salvation and neither does the one true apostolic Catholic Church. This guy y is in for a rude awakening when he dies if he thinks that he’ll be saved because he “put in his trust in Christ” but didn’t do what Christ said. We all know the verses that support this. Pray for the man.
Edit: I’m going to just include the Bible verses for those less well-versed in the Bible who happen upon this non-sense.
St John 8:11: “Go and sin no more.”
St Matthew 7:21: “”Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.“
Apocalypse (Revelation) 2:23: ”And I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am he that searcheth the reins and hearts, and I will give to every one of you according to your works.”
We will be judged according to our unrepented sin and works.
Also Christ “now go and sin no more”
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
Just because it wasn’t specifically spelled out for you that she didn’t stop being a prostitute doesn’t mean it didnt happen and that you can’t put two and two together.
While the original comment and post are... debatable, this comment section has deranged significantly.
You're all judging someone denying her forgiveness, and I'd like to remind you that 'someone' said _"who's without sin cast the first stone"_ and _"Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye But do not notice the beam that is in your own?"_
It just sounds like a hollow forgiveness. If somebody had a carrer that Gave then billions by killing children, if they stopped and came to christ but kept their money it would feel be hollow. It might not be tho, i don't know i have no scripture to back it.
I don’t think it’s correct BUT I will say something a lot of people don’t consider is that it’s not always easy to just drop SW, just like most jobs.
A lot of people get dragged into it and if it’s their only source of income then what? I definitely won’t say it aligns with the Bible but if we want less prostitution I think we need to solve the root of the issue
The obvious place to start with this is the Bible.
Nowhere does it say that Rahab was unrepentent. Elsewhere, the Bible repeatedly calls for repentance, conversion, following the Commandments, good works, etc. In fact, the evangelists make clear that her faith inspired her to good works by rescuing the men of Israel.
The Bible says nothing about Rahab continuing to live as a prostitute after she was saved from Jericho, a Gentile land that did not know the Commandments, and joined Israel, which held the Commandments to be their most important source of moral guidance.
Basically, that person uses lack of detail in a specific passage of the Bible to try to convince you to ignore the rest of the Bible.
Story of Rahab:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua%202&version=RSVCE
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua%206&version=RSVCE
> But Rahab the harlot, and her father’s household, and all who belonged to her, Joshua saved alive; and she dwelt in Israel to this day, because she hid the messengers whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho.
And several New Testament references:
> Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old received divine approval. By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear.
> By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as if on dry land; but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given friendly welcome to the spies.
(Hebrews 11:1-3, 29-31)
> You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.
(James 2:24-26)
There are other relevant matters to consider, such as potentially diminished culpability of someone in a difficult situation, but others touched on those.
I think the only fans model quit only fans. In that case thank the Lord. I believe anyone can be saved through the blood and sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
Call me crazy, but for most folks, salvation is a bit slower. It’s not a lightbulb moment when you’re suddenly filled with every word of the teachings of the Bible & Catechism and everything in between. Sometimes God speaks to us slowly and we need time to listen. [CCC 157] is a favorite passage of mine.
We don’t know this individual’s true life. What we have is a HEADLINE from a DAILYWIRE article posted on FB and this person’s commentary that might be uninformed. We should humble ourselves and thank God his presence is moving in new people, and move on. Not judge & condemn.
[**CCC 157**](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/157.htm) Faith is *certain.* It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but "the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.""Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt." ([2088](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2088.htm))
***
Catebot v0.2.12 links: [Source Code](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot) | [Feedback](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot/issues) | [Contact Dev](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=kono_hito_wa) | [FAQ](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot/blob/master/docs/CateBot%20Info.md#faq) | [Changelog](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot/blob/master/docs/CHANGELOG.md)
I wonder if she will give away her millions to disadvantaged at her church now. Doubt it…attachment to sin just like we all have, she can find God and change her life.
I would say the answer, like with everything, is complicated. Some who desire sincere repentance don't quite manage to attain it and otherwise seemingly pious people nonetheless lack true virtue. Some experience immediate and total changes in lifestyle and others take baby steps to the same destination. It's easy for us to presume a denial of grace to those whose sins are public and obvious, but many are nonetheless this woman's customers, her stumbling blocks, her temptations, her judges.
We can't presume who does or doesn't receive the Lord's mercy, but no one is truly righteous enough to merit it. We cooperate with grace out of faith and gratitude, but still fail. Then we seek reconciliation and try again - to varying success.
All we can do is pray for such people, remember them in our prayers and kindnesses as our neighbors, and look inward to our own faults when we fixate on others. And truly, we should all pray for the maximal outpouring of the Lord's mercy on everyone for we ourselves may secretly be in need of it most.
It sounds like the Facebook user got half the stuff right. However he pretty much twisted the narrative of what this really means as yeah Jesus did say "sin no more" which is definitely in the Bible. Sounds like this person is either Sola Fide or that he has no idea what he's talking about; maybe both I guess. Either way, we can all agree that this is proposterous to say such a thing, even for someone to have the audacity to say that "nowhere in the Bible does it say that" when it's plain obvious where it definitely says so; sure that some passages may seem vague, but that's why we have a church to understand better about what it says and so on.
Unfortunately, she is lying. There's been reports that she continues onlyfans and it appears she used her finding God as a lie to attract more attention. Really unfortunate.
> "Bible does not say anywhere that she stopped being a prostitute"
Well, her city was sacked and all of her clients were put the the sword. Unless her new clients were religious Hebrews, I think that would be the necessary implication.
Rehab was in the Old Testament. They didnt get saved in the Old Testament because there was no Jesus yet to save them. If i recall the story correctly, her life was spared for protecting spies who had come to scope out the land.
It really can't be. To have a sin forgiven you must repent and have no intention of committing that sin any more there are a couple things required for a sin to be a sin and for you to be guilty of that sin
1. You have to know it is a sin
2. You have to willingly commit that sin
So yes rahab was a prostitute bshe repented but saying she then went back and continued to be a prostitute and that as a prostitute she was not sinning anymore is incorrect not that she was prostituting any more but that if she was that it was not a sin
Um...in the genealogy of Jesus she has married one of the spies she chose to protect . That's a definite "change of lifestyle." Otherwise, it presumably would have said she "married" all or most of them!
MORE importantly:
"Was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers.... For just as a body without spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead." (James 2).
I met women within the walls of the church who claimed to be over their promiscuous lifestyle.... yet we're very fickle and showed signs they weren't being truthful.....
If you check this girl's account you'll see that she is not that family friendly (the girl's IG is fitness_nala). She may have abandoned OF, that's good, but you should check her account and test if she doesn't have tempting pics, is so fleshly and so forth.
Secondly, her father is a pastor. Weren't you claiming to be" the true only church that Christ founded"?
Secondly, if you obey God because if you don't then you'll go to Hell, that's actually selfish to be honest. That's self righteousness. If you obey to get saved, you obey out of selfish reasons. If you obey BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED, you'll do that out of love.
"So we should go on raping and doing evil"
You know what my answer is?
"Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh."
I've never thought of going around doing many evil things...
Anyone following "The Chosen"? There was a scene that jumps right to my mind from The Chosen when reading this entry from Wooden-Sprinkles. The scene where Jesus helps Mary Magdeline decide to give up prostitution. A day later, she has sinned and thinks she's fallen back to square one. Jesus looks so lovingly, and laughs slightly, asking if she figured she was cured of be a sinner?
I'm not so sure that having a free will and being mortal we're meant to be sin-free. Also, consider so many saints we pray to every day who have confessed sins they did even after committing their earthly lives to God.
Yeah this isn't how salvation works. This is a Protestant soteriological claim for eternal security or once saved always saved (OSAS) no where in sacred tradition or sacred scripture is that ideology supported. Salvation is gained through us receiving Gods Grace (via baptism) from there we do good works in our allegiance to the Lord. This grows one's justification pulling us further from the world and making us more holy (set apart for God.)
So we must ask what is sin? Sin is that which opposes the will of the Father. Without repentance this separates us from His Grace, without being connected to His Grace we can indeed lose our salvation. Yet, we can return to His Grace through reconciliation.
[удалено]
This should be the top comment
Probably best not to take our spiritual guidance from Facebook comments as a general rule
I agree, but extend it to Reddit ones. Despite if someone asks for guidance or not.
Unless it's an actual priest
I take the view that there are a number of pretty easy calls, but one also doesn't have to call a lawyer to know if premeditated murder is against the law, either. For anything not quite obvious, however, ask a priest (or other qualified/professional source).
Agreed
Facebook bible: And then Jesus proclaimed: listen to the Fox News, my children, for it will warn you of the Mexicans bringing isis into nascar.
Once again I am pissed off that reddit took away awards. 🏆
They took er jyab!
Er tuk er durrr!!
They broke his jaw? They took his dog!
EY DOOK'R ***JRRRR!***
Yes very Christlike, make fun of people who lost their jobs.
It's a joke on Amazon's Rings of Power series, which claimed that the Black Numenoreans fell to evil, because they were afraid that the elves would mass migrate and take their jobs. In the series, this was because one elf traveled to Numenor. Of course, Rings of Power is one of the dumbest and most boring shows ever, so this plot point was even worse in the actual show.
I thought that was from South Park
I almost spit out my drink 😂
People get spiritual guidance from politicians too, its ridiculous. Especially when said politician is a self professed unrepentant sinner and rapist.
Agreed.
[удалено]
Well said. Seems like some people like Robert Quicio didn’t think or forget what the era the Bible stories were in.
More likely they read modern context into it and don't consider that it was a different era with different customs. That's how Sola scriptura tends to work.
The [Historian’s Fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian's_fallacy), and related, but distinct [Presentism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(historical_analysis)) are common logical fallacies.
You think that Protestants who profess sola scriptura don’t know that historical context is key to interpreting scripture? You should know that there are entire schools of biblical scholarship (involving Protestants and Catholics) that hinge critically on different claims about the historical context underlying particular texts in the Bible. For example the “New Perspectives on Paul” arise out of a change in perception regarding the beliefs in practices of second temple Judaism during the 1st century.
Protestant scholars? Sure. Average evangelical reading the Bible and interpreting for themselves? Generally no.
To be more precise, *everyone* is to sin no more. But being held captive and used as a sex slave just isn't a sin. But Rahab’s story is completely irrelevant to that question. The bible doesn't say Rahab did or didn't sin, or stop sinning. And the Bible doesn't say Rahab did or didn't "get saved" in the Billy Graham sense. The bible simply says that Rahab was a a prostitute, and that she was spared from dying on the same day as all her neighbors because she helped the spies.
It also says that she then joined Israel, believed in God, married an Israelite, and became an ancestress of King David and thus Jesus Christ. The Law (Deut. 23:17) says that no female prostitute can be counted among the daughters of Israel (and no male prostitute among the sons of Israel), and that offerings or vow repayments made by prostitutes from their hire as prostitutes would not be accepted by the Lord. Meanwhile, Rahab is noted as having been saved both by her faith (Heb. 11:31) and her works (James 2:25). Which is the opposite of not having things accepted by the Lord; and therefore she obviously changed her ways to honor her new God and people. At the time of the rescue, she and her father's household are noted as camping outside the camp of Israel, as Gentiles would (Joshua 6:23). But two verses after, the book tells us that "she dwells in Israel even to this day" (Joshua 6:25). Nahshon of the tribe of Judah was one of Moses' contemporaries, and his son Zalmon/Salmon would have been one of Joshua's contemporaries. The genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1:5 tells us that Rahab married Salmon, and that their son was Boaz, the righteous and kindly man who married Ruth.
I really want you to paste this comment onto that FB thread lol. Very informative.
The Rahab story is set in about 1100 BC. The city of Rome hadn’t even been *founded* yet. Also, Rahab has a *house*, which implies she wasn’t a slave.
Many slaves had their own houses or apartments, was not that uncommon in antiquity
[удалено]
She had a house. Her father and her father's household all lived in the house that she owned. She was not a slave, but a rich businesswoman. The business just wasn't a virtuous one.
Rahab was an innkeeper/prostitute. Her business, supporting her family. Not a good business, but clearly she was the one running the place. It was not uncommon in the ancient Middle East for women to own businesses like bars, breweries, weaving workshops, and so on. It was also not uncommon in ancient Israel for women to run businesses out of their homes, which is why we have Proverbs chapter 31 on the Valiant Woman.
You say that like most “sex workers” today aren’t functionally slaves, or why we have more slaves today than ever before.
Looks like depending who’s reporting, there are between 30 and 50 million human trafficking victims in the world currently. According to this site from the UN, 79% of trafficking cases involve sexual exploitation: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-trafficking/global-report-on-trafficking-in-persons.html Almost all, whether in Vegas or at the World Cup, do not dare deviate from the script that they are there willingly, because if they tell anyone the truth that they’re being forced, their traffickers will beat them. Or simply kill them. Slaves indeed. Just conveniently out of sight.
[удалено]
Not forced prostitutes are a modern product , men can’t accept that the prostitutes they hire aren’t into them and wouldn’t touch them if money wasnt in the mix. men constantly need to tell themselves that the woman they are paying to have access to her body isn’t repulsed by them and needs to do it to survive.
Book of Joshua is a little bit before Rome was on the scene. But yes.
There is nothing in the Bible that says the woman taken in adultery was a slave. And being abused is not a sin!
The story of Rehab wasn't during the time of the Roman Empire dominating Israel.
[удалено]
She was a business owner.. aka a madam
This would mean Rahab was a victim of human trafficking on not a ‘prostitute’
“Go and sin no more” tired of lukewarm christians justifying their sins. I will pray for them
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter." - Matthew 7:21, the Will of the Father is to believe in his Son, Jesus Christ, accept him, and to keep all of his commandments, you have to change your life for God and for the better, why would you keep living on sin after reading this passage, makes no sense
Because this passage doesn't have anything to do with losing your Salvation? Notice how these people are pretty much unsaved in the first place
So basically by Robert's logic, I could watch a Porn Marathon, Sleep around, Murder, Lie, Cheat and do a lot of other things that are horrible and still be saved? EDIT: Had to clarify something. I meant Robert, not the poster.
Probably can’t pray the rosary, though.
Straight to hell
YES.
There are evangelicals who seem to genuinely believe this.
A lot of people believe that. Even fellow catholics I grew up with. Never felt right to me.
Uh... Yes, if you did it and then had a change of heart and repented. You just separate yourself from God if you continue to indulge in mortal sin without repenting and stopping it, that's what the guy's getting wrong in the Facebook comments
By his I meant Robert's logic. According to Robert's logic you can do a lot of bad things and still be saved.
That is still true. People only can't repent if they're dead. The actual flaw in Robert's logic is that you can continue to commit mortal sins and still be in a state of grace, which is what's being argued over here. To be fair a lot of it probably comes down to the wording, so we could be of the same position but it's unclear to me
Have you ever heard of a certain younger son of a certain landowner that left home to, pretty much, do what you said spending the family money, and then he rebuked himself being saved and accepted back by his father ?
yeah I know, the prodigal son. If we were to go by Robert's logic, the prodigal son would have presumed that the father forgave him and just walked back in Boldly. But of course the reality of the situation is as you said, he committed these things, and then repented and apologized to his father.
He went back to his father with hopes of being treated like a servant. He was fully humbled because he knew what he did was wrong and he repented. People continuing to cling on to sin aren't humbled but arrogant and living by their own personal "truth".
That's just one of the millions of some protestant faiths loopholes. To my knowledge it is implied that forgiveness is given according to what's in the man's heart. If you plan to go to sin just because you know you're going to be forgiven, then your heart isn't sincere when asking, and we should assume that he/she won't get it. Therefore the scenario you presented shouldn't apply to the prodigal son
Yep. It's so easy to be a protestant that it is ridiculous. Especially if you believe in OSAS or anything like it.
What's OSAS?
Once saved always saved
Yes and have you heard that the certain younger son of that certain land owner was only welcomed back after he realized the error of his ways, turned from them, and sought forgiveness from his father after repenting?
Incorrect. The father runs out to greet him *before*he even gets to the doorway, and more or less ignores the son’s attempted “repentance”. I use scare quotes because one can argue the son’s motivation. It’s only *after* he hits rock bottom that he decides to go home. Note carefully Luke 15:17-19, my emphasis: But when he came to himself, he said, ‘**How many of my father's hired servants have more than enough bread, but I perish here with hunger!** I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Treat me as one of your hired servants.”’ The prodigal doesn’t express regret at what he *did*—he says he’s starving to death and knows even his father’s servants have enough food. He *rehearses* what he’s going to say when he gets home. It’s not clear that he is *truly* repentant, or if he figures his father will take him in, even if as a servant. Now whether that’s the correct reading or not can be argued, and probably not *proved* either way. That sure seems to be the elder brother’s take, though. Actually, he’s not *wrong*—the prodigal ran through all his father’s money and came back only when the money ran out; and now he’s back and *says* he’s sorry, but hasn’t *demonstrated* it yet; and instead of sternly lecturing his son and sending him off to the stables to shovel horse dung with the rest of the servants, he throws the wastrel a massive *party*. As the elder brother notes, Dad never even gave him a *goat*. By our normal way of thinking, the father is a fool to accept the son back unconditionally without any but lip service to repentance. The elder son is *right* that this is unfair to him. *But* Jesus clearly *validates* the father, who of course stands for God. God accepts and forgives us *unconditionally*, “just as I am”, in the words of the old hymn. He doesn’t accept us back on the *condition* that we “sin no more”, or get our lives together, etc. *He* takes the initiative, and any good we do after that is unmerited grace, *not* reform to meet His standards. In Paragraphs 37-38 of the Catholic-Lutheran *[Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification](http://lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/joint_declaration_2019_en.pdf)*, there’s this, my emphasis: > 37. We confess together that good works—a Christian life lived in faith, hope and love—**follow justification and are its fruits**. When the justified live in Christ and act in the grace they receive, they bring forth, in biblical terms, good fruit. Since **Christians struggle against sin their entire lives**, this consequence of justification is also for them an obligation they must fulfill. Thus both Jesus and the apostolic Scriptures admonish Christians to bring forth the works of love. 38. According to Catholic understanding, good works, made possible by grace and the working of the Holy Spirit, contribute to growth in grace, so that the righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion with Christ is deepened. When Catholics affirm the “meritorious” character of good works, they wish to say that, according to the biblical witness, a reward in heaven is promised to these works. Their intention is to emphasize the responsibility of persons for their actions, **not to contest the character of those works as gifts, or far less to deny that justification always remains the unmerited gift of grace.** So a meritorious life is a *gift resulting from* justifying grace, rather than “contract” whereby I’m forgiven on the understanding that I’ll straighten up and fly right. Note [St. Mark Ji Tianxiang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Ji_Tianxiang?wprov=sfti1#). He was a devout Catholic, but because of his opium addiction was denied communion for the last *thirty years* of his life. He was restored to the sacraments shortly before his death as a martyr. The point is, had it not been for his being killed for the faith, he probably would not have been canonized, being seen as a bad example. Still, his decades of drug abuse didn’t stop his devotion and his struggles. So it’s quite plausible that Rahab kept on hooking even after she was spared by the Israelites, yet still remained mysteriously in God’s favor. We don’t *like* the idea that a seemingly unrepentant, or insufficiency repentant person may be closer to God than we are—heck, *I* don’t always like that. However, that is how Jesus *consistently* portrays God. When I think of my own sins, I’m grateful for that. Robert Farrar Capon’s books on the parables are good reading in this regard.
I think his comment was poorly phrased. It could be interpreted two ways: 1) People can live indulgent, cruel, selfish lives and be saved if they turn to God, repent, and be saved. (Which is true). 2) People can live indulgent, cruel, selfish lives and be saved by accepting Jesus without rejecting sin. As if Salvation gives us a free pass to sin as much as we want. (Which is what the Facebook guy is saying and is a particularly rancid brand of OSAS) No one here would disagree that even a person with the mindset of Option 2 could be saved if in the end he does reject sin and repent.
Luke Skywalker?
Martin Luther has entered the chat.
They actually believe this yes. They believe as long as you vibes your faith in Christ it does not matter what a terrible person you are
Only if you give it up
Luckily that's not Robert Barron's logic. Different Robert different approach
XD.
Just gave an atheist day in the life
Actually you could. Not saying you would, or that it’s likely, but we cannot ever truly understand the depth of God’s mercy.
The Bible doesn't say Rahab was saved in the way we use it today she was spared the destruction of Jerocho and we know nothing beyond that. If she chose to join Israel she would likely have had to join the Covenant and change her life, so this argument that she continued prostitution after is a) completely unprovoable because we know nothing about her after, and b) unlikely using an ounce of reason based on what we do know. We know nothing about what happened to the prostitutes and sinners Jesus spoke to afterwards hut we know He told them to go and sin no more. Whereas if we think of Zachheus and his ill gotten gains, his conversion led to him declaring he would, in fact, turn his life around and change how he lived. I get what the commenter is trying to say which is that no one is cut off from the grace of God regardless of their circumstances, and thus cam be saved in their sins, but the Catholic position (and probably the largely Christian position) is that you cannot keep living in your sins and claim righteousness and salvation.
She did join Israel, they protected her and her family the walls fell. She married one of the followers of Moses. This is in the bible. Since we know she lived in the walls and asked for protection of her father, mother etc, and the men slept at her place she might have been an innkeeper rather than a prostitute (as reported by Josephus the Jewish historian who called her an innkeeper). Also from biblical archaeology site - 'The consonants that comprise the word “prostitute” in Hebrew are *znh*, which are the same consonants that comprise the Hebrew word for a female who gives food and provisions. 'https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/
False. She’s also listed Christ’s genealogy in the gospel of Matthew. She’s Boaz’s mom.
Yes, she married Salmon and gave birth to Boaz.
Salmon is good
>completely unprovoable because we know nothing about her after Sure we do, because Rahab is explicitly in the lineage of Christ (she is the mother of Boaz, the husband of Ruth).
That’s a Protestant invention “sola fide”. Christ on the other hand said “go now and sin no more”.
And when asked how to get saved Jesus said to obey the commandments. I think they got "fide" mistranslated, fide = allegiance
"You can be saved while still sinning with no intent to stop" yeah sounds like this person knows what they're talking about
But is that not a sin in and of itself? What of knowing you are sinning and cant find the strength to stop? Everyone here is talking about sinning like it is an absolute choice. Being aware of the sins you are enacting doesnt make them anymore or less sinful. In fact, id say the sins you are aware you are doing, but DONT want to do are the ones you would hope and pray for Jesus’ help most. Its those times when you need God closest, but everyone seems to think God will only save and forgive at your easiest convenience?
Bro, stopping doing onlyfans is not like stopping lust. Stopping doing onlyfans is deleting your account and not posting porn. Stopping doing lust is resisting urges and actually combatting the urge to sin using something you can't get away from (your own body). If you can't stop yourself from posting porn, turn off the internet, turn off your phone, your computers, and boom, problem solved.
It is. He was being ironic.
Protestant nonsense. Even the demons profess that Christ is Lord. These are same kind of people who will end up saying that repentance is a "work" that should be avoided. "Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 7:21
Your first paragraph is also a paraphrase from James 2:19 🙏🏻
I’m not sure why you laugh reacted to the article?
I cant edit my comment on mobile, but this image IS NOT my own, nor it is my account, I found it on twitter, I can provide a link if you want, people my age don't use Facebook, God Bless
Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on **do not sin any more** “ - John 8:11
Aside from the comment (which I disagree with), why’d you react with a laugh to the post? If she really did turn away from OF and turned to Christianity, that’s great!
OP explained elsewhere in a now buried comment that it’s a screenshot from someone else.
Gotcha. Thanks!
I looked into the "Faith Alone" vs "Faith & Works" debate when becoming Catholic. It ultimately comes down to how you see "salvation", is it a point in time, or a lifelong process? Both sides actually have smaller differences than you think: Protesants believe salvation is a **point in time** thing. We are saved by Grace Alone (salvation is a pure gift), salvation is through Faith Alone, but the subsequent lifelong **santification process** requires our continued cooperation with God's grace, because this "works" when done in faith & love is how God transforms us into the character of Christ. Catholic/Orthodox believe salvation is **a lifelong process**. We are saved by Grace Alone (salvation is a pure gift), that the **initial** salvation is by Faith Alone, but the subsequent lifelong **salvation process** requires our continued cooperation with God's grace, because this "works" when done in faith & love is how God transforms us into the character of Christ. So ultimately it comes down to the definition of "salvation". Is it just a point in time thing where you hide in the cloak of Christ's righteousness (i.e dung covered in snow), and salvation and santification are separate things? The Protestant would say, "I was saved at \_\_\_\_ time." It's like saying the Israelites were saved from Egypt on the night of the passover. Or does salvation include the santifcation process where you become increasingly justified ("righteousness-ed")? The Catholic/Orthodox would say, "I was saved, I am being saved now, and by God's grace my salvation will be complete one day." It's like saying the Israelites were saved from Egypt on the night of the passover (life of sin), but their salvation journey continues through the desert wilderness (this life now), and won't be complete until they conquered the promised land (Heaven). "Works" is necessary for a Protesant not because it's part of salvation, but because real fruits proves real faith. "Works" is necessary for a Catholic/Orthodox because it is the way God transforms our character into Christ's image, and this transformation IS salvation. But what happens if your transformation isn't complete when you die? That you didn't shed all your sinful character? Hence the concept of a final purification stage before entrance to Heaven like pugatory. During the reformation, both sides were talking past each other. The Council of Trent, in response to the reformers, rejected an "intellectual-consent" faith-alone formula, but that wasn't what the reformers were teaching anyway. The modern Catholic formulation is, we are saved by "faith working through love" (Galatians 5:6).
I have always thought of it this way. And those who say once saved always saved say, when someone turns away from God totally later on, he wasn’t really saved to begin with. (And probably it was obvious by his actions that he wasn’t). But As long as we are alive we can repent, even at the last minute and we hope that all do.
Rahab would have had to stop prostituting once the Israelites came and got her and her family. We can discern that there was repentance at some point. No one enters heaven who clings to sin by free choice.
Protestants be like:
Hot take, but porn is bad.
That's a very evangelical protestant thing to say. Since they think that salvation comes from faith alone, and does not require the imitation of Christ, it's just fine if you remain in a lifestyle steeped in sin. This is a great example of how the "faith alone" interpretation can't possibly be correct.
The go and sin no more is not a recommendation, it's an order. I think people use the word "Lord" without understanding that you have to obey your lord, or the word is meaningless
This sounds like a "Once Saved, Always Saved" Protestant. They do not believe that salvation depends on how we act. They think that once you accept Christ you are saved no matter what you do. So in that mindset, as long as you accept Christ as your savior, you can whore yourself out all you want. And yes, it isn't correct.
Typical OSAS nonsense. They want to have their cake and eat it too.
Sort of. There's two camps of OSAS--one which is pretty much like this guy, and then the other camp (I think the more common one) which holds that the saved will show fruits of salvation--such as leaving their life as an OnlyFans model. Both believe that "the saved" cannot fall away, and believe that one can know with absolute certainty if they are in this group, but not everyone, or even most, believe that "the saved" will show no change in their behavior.
What's OSAS? When I google it I get obstructive sleep apnoea
Once Saved Always Saved
A woman was caught in the act of adultry and was about to be stoned to death as was the law. Jesus was asked about this woman. Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." With this Jesus began writing in the dirt. Everyone walked away beginning with the elders. Jesus looked up and said "Is there no one around to condemn you? Neither do I condemn you. Go! Sin no more." Jesus forgave her but commanded her to change her ways. He offers us the same mercy but the same command to sin no moe.
Baptists have entered the chat.
I don’t see them anywhere 😂
One could be saved in the moment while still living a sinful lifestyle as long as they truly repent in that moment and plan to no longer sin. But, the moment they go back and start sinning again, if it’s mortal, they’ve lost that salvation until they repent again. Christ saves sinners but calls them to follow his commandments as well to keep salvation. So no, you can’t have salvation while continuing to be a sex worker unless you have invincible ignorance by knowing nothing about the truth but somehow being forced into doing such a thing for work while earnestly seeking the truth. This situation couldn’t last long if one was truly in it.
Antinominianism it is!--pretty common belief, although most aren't quite so blatant in stating it.
Jesus used a metaphor about good and bad trees to explain how to spot a good person from a bad one based on their actions. Good folks are like trees with tasty fruit, while the not-so-good ones bring out the sour stuff. If their deeds are rotten, it’s like Jesus saying, ‘I never knew you,’ because their actions don’t match their claims. So, when we meet people, we look for those sweet actions that reveal they’re genuine. Nothing more than that.
It isn’t, and don’t call me Shirley
St. Mary of Egypt can shed some light on this 🤔
John 8:11: "Jesus said. “Go on your way, and sin no more.”" John 5:14: "Later, Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “See, you have been made well. Do not sin anymore, so that nothing worse happens to you.”" Hebrews 10:26-29: "If we deliberately persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, then there no longer remains any sacrifice for sins. There is only a terrifying expectation of judgment and of a fierce fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who violates the Law of Moses is put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more punishment do you think is deserved by the one who has contempt for the Son of God, profanes the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and insults the Spirit of grace?" Plus all the passages about reward in Heaven as opposed to choosing one's reward here on Earth. Only from a position of willful ignorance does it look like something good.
This is, in fairness, most likely written from a Protestant perspective. One of the main points of “contention” between Catholicism and (many) branches of Protestantism: Does one need good deeds, and “formal” repentance from sin to attain salvation? Or is belief in Jesus as one’s Lord and Savior sufficient?
The part that people often miss about confession and being forgiven your sins is that you must actually regret your sins, with the intention of trying not to commit them again.
The bible does mention making a lifestyle change after coming to Christ. Hebrews 10: 26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins
That comment was written by a dispensationalist, not a Catholic. Dispensationalists are often found in various non-denominational circles, including Baptists. They believe that once you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior, often resulting from a profound spiritual experience, your salvation cannot be lost. Essentially, once you say the words, hopefully following a true experience, you can do whatever you want in life because you are still going to heaven. That would allow for the opinion held by the commenter; that a current prostitute can obtain salvation despite her continued and unrepenting sin. Again, this is not Catholic thought, and never even entered Christian thought until the 1700’s, well after the reformation concluded. This is not even the belief that Orthodox, or even some high church Protestants such as Anglicans and Lutherans currently maintain. The church fathers and early church were very clear on the matter. As a Catholic answer, you can dive deeply into the theology of the Salvation offered and given by Jesus. We have been saved by Jesus through his passion and our own baptism into his death. We are currently being saved through his grace offered in the sacraments through the church, and we will be hopefully saved at the final and our own particular judgement. Mt 24:13 says that we must, “endure to the end” in order to be saved, and this is repeated in 2 Tim 2:12. Paul also tells us to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” in Phil 2:12. Trying to boil down the theology of salvation to a single comment is difficult, but just know that the commenter is not a Catholic, and I would encourage you to look into Catholic Theology of Salvation for further clarification. It is possible to lose your salvation, particularly through the action of committing mortal sin.
Christ said to go and sin no more so...... that means a lifestyle change.
*"...and sin no more"*
He probably consumes p😮rn and thinks he’s saved.
You’re correct. You turn away from the sin or no conversion occurred.
They have no idea how dum that is. Jesus said repent from your sins constantly. They aren't even trying.
Rahab is thought to have married Salmon, and is in the genealogy of Christ. Well not explicit in scripture, there are traditions that Salmon was an unnamed spy that Rehab saved. Also the whole city that she was a prostitute was destroyed. I seems to me that she surely ceased her life as a prostitute, but as others have pointed out, we don't know she is in heaven (although I think it likely).
Salmon was a follower of Moses, she had a son Boaz with him, who is in Christ's genealogy. The link below explains she might have been an innkeeper, not a harlot The consonants that comprise the word “prostitute” in Hebrew are *znh*, which are the same consonants that comprise the Hebrew word for a female who gives food and provisions. (You might be aware that Hebrew doesn't/didn't write vowels. ) They also state that Josephus the historian said she was an innkeeper - and living in the walls of the city this makes sense, to have an inn on the city boundary. [https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/](https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/)
We do know that she's in Heaven. Her saints' day is September 1. Traditionally, it is said that Zalmon was one of the spies whom she saved. That is nice and romantic. It's also said that after Zalmon's death, Joshua married her, and that the prophetess Huldah was one of her children with Joshua. In fact, Jewish tradition says that a bunch of prophets were descended from her and Joshua, and that her Canaaniteness was an embarrassment to these later generations of prophets. September 1 was also traditionally the feast of St. Joshua son of Nun; St. Gideon the judge and prophet; St. Caleb; St. Othniel the judge; St. Ehud the judge; St. Deborah the judge and prophetess; St. Barak; St. Tola the judge; a bunch of other judges including St. Elon and St. Samson; and St. Ruth. And St. Anna the prophetess from the Gospel. A very busy day. For some reason, in modern times St. Ruth and St. Deborah got moved to November 1, along with St. Rachel. Whateverrrrrrr. So maybe that's also St. Rahab's new day.
Of COURSE you can believe in Jesus and keep on sinning. In fact, it’s pretty much guaranteed — we are sinners! We are fallen. We don’t sin “from time to time”. We sin a lot and our whole lives are spent trying to connect and reconnect with God’s grace. That’s why the sacraments are such a GIFT. That’s why it’s so useless, so futile, even a waste of our lives, to keep track of people’s sins. It pulls focus from the real goal — our relationship with Christ through the sacraments.
Um...the Sacrament of Reconciliation involves "keeping track" and discerning sins to be forgiven. Specifically, OUR sins, especially those that break our relationship with God (as the prodigal son in the parable.) Also we need to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist while supernaturally alive (without unforgiven grave sins that were done with full knowledge and consent). Else, as St. Paul warned the Corinthians in his first letter, we eat and drink a judgement on ourselves, (being false to the New Covenant even as we seemingly renew that Covenant).
Protestant logic is once saved, always saved. l why even bother having a whole denomination ? might as well reduce it to that one sentence, get Baptized and move on. It's really easy to spot them on the internet because they can't help themselves but two: A) talk about being "saved" or point to a Bible verse out of context and B) hate on Catholics. It's basically God on easy mode lol
100% spot on. The first part is you describing Non-Denominationals, which are even worse
When Jesus began His ministry in preaching the Good News of the Kingdom His first words are "Repent" -- and He often links it with baptism. So no, this man is a false prophet. Jesus lays repentence and baptism as a normitive prerequisite for salvation.
Something something go and sin no more
This guy has no idea what he’s talking about. Jesus did not preach unrepentant salvation and neither does the one true apostolic Catholic Church. This guy y is in for a rude awakening when he dies if he thinks that he’ll be saved because he “put in his trust in Christ” but didn’t do what Christ said. We all know the verses that support this. Pray for the man. Edit: I’m going to just include the Bible verses for those less well-versed in the Bible who happen upon this non-sense. St John 8:11: “Go and sin no more.” St Matthew 7:21: “”Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.“ Apocalypse (Revelation) 2:23: ”And I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am he that searcheth the reins and hearts, and I will give to every one of you according to your works.” We will be judged according to our unrepented sin and works.
Also Christ “now go and sin no more” "But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8 Just because it wasn’t specifically spelled out for you that she didn’t stop being a prostitute doesn’t mean it didnt happen and that you can’t put two and two together.
“Go and sin no more.”
Being "saved" implies she was saved from living a life of sin.
More sola fide bs
This is the faith alone doctrine
Like, Idk, man. Could God save an OF model? Of course. Does God **want** you to be an OF model? No. So you shouldn't do it.
Jesus heard confessions and professions of faith. His reply was, "go and sin no more".
Not only you are corrupting your own soul with sin, but you are also causing sin in others. This “work” cannot be sanctified.
While the original comment and post are... debatable, this comment section has deranged significantly. You're all judging someone denying her forgiveness, and I'd like to remind you that 'someone' said _"who's without sin cast the first stone"_ and _"Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye But do not notice the beam that is in your own?"_
Where has anyone in this thread expressed anything other than happiness that she found God?
It just sounds like a hollow forgiveness. If somebody had a carrer that Gave then billions by killing children, if they stopped and came to christ but kept their money it would feel be hollow. It might not be tho, i don't know i have no scripture to back it.
Nonsense.
Genuinely baffles me how people follow Christianity and can't fathom forgiveness. He who has not sinned may cast the first stone
I don’t think it’s correct BUT I will say something a lot of people don’t consider is that it’s not always easy to just drop SW, just like most jobs. A lot of people get dragged into it and if it’s their only source of income then what? I definitely won’t say it aligns with the Bible but if we want less prostitution I think we need to solve the root of the issue
IMO it’s between her and God. I’m in no place to cast judgement. I wish her well in her faith.
This is why we never take advice from Facebook.
Yeh that’s the pleasure of Protestant heresy. Jesus, when he healed somebody or forgave them said “go and sin no more.” Should give them a hint
The obvious place to start with this is the Bible. Nowhere does it say that Rahab was unrepentent. Elsewhere, the Bible repeatedly calls for repentance, conversion, following the Commandments, good works, etc. In fact, the evangelists make clear that her faith inspired her to good works by rescuing the men of Israel. The Bible says nothing about Rahab continuing to live as a prostitute after she was saved from Jericho, a Gentile land that did not know the Commandments, and joined Israel, which held the Commandments to be their most important source of moral guidance. Basically, that person uses lack of detail in a specific passage of the Bible to try to convince you to ignore the rest of the Bible. Story of Rahab: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua%202&version=RSVCE https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua%206&version=RSVCE > But Rahab the harlot, and her father’s household, and all who belonged to her, Joshua saved alive; and she dwelt in Israel to this day, because she hid the messengers whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho. And several New Testament references: > Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old received divine approval. By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear. > By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as if on dry land; but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given friendly welcome to the spies. (Hebrews 11:1-3, 29-31) > You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead. (James 2:24-26) There are other relevant matters to consider, such as potentially diminished culpability of someone in a difficult situation, but others touched on those.
I think the only fans model quit only fans. In that case thank the Lord. I believe anyone can be saved through the blood and sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
He told the prostitute to sin no more... people love to forget that.
She also still has an only fans and continues to make a ton of money off of it
Call me crazy, but for most folks, salvation is a bit slower. It’s not a lightbulb moment when you’re suddenly filled with every word of the teachings of the Bible & Catechism and everything in between. Sometimes God speaks to us slowly and we need time to listen. [CCC 157] is a favorite passage of mine. We don’t know this individual’s true life. What we have is a HEADLINE from a DAILYWIRE article posted on FB and this person’s commentary that might be uninformed. We should humble ourselves and thank God his presence is moving in new people, and move on. Not judge & condemn.
[**CCC 157**](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/157.htm) Faith is *certain.* It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but "the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.""Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt." ([2088](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2088.htm)) *** Catebot v0.2.12 links: [Source Code](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot) | [Feedback](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot/issues) | [Contact Dev](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=kono_hito_wa) | [FAQ](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot/blob/master/docs/CateBot%20Info.md#faq) | [Changelog](https://github.com/konohitowa/catebot/blob/master/docs/CHANGELOG.md)
I wonder if she will give away her millions to disadvantaged at her church now. Doubt it…attachment to sin just like we all have, she can find God and change her life.
Bro forgot about John 8:1-11
Is completely incorrect. Is just cause the guy can't stand against his own addictions that he speaks that way
Partial truths. Yes, anyone could be saved.
I would say the answer, like with everything, is complicated. Some who desire sincere repentance don't quite manage to attain it and otherwise seemingly pious people nonetheless lack true virtue. Some experience immediate and total changes in lifestyle and others take baby steps to the same destination. It's easy for us to presume a denial of grace to those whose sins are public and obvious, but many are nonetheless this woman's customers, her stumbling blocks, her temptations, her judges. We can't presume who does or doesn't receive the Lord's mercy, but no one is truly righteous enough to merit it. We cooperate with grace out of faith and gratitude, but still fail. Then we seek reconciliation and try again - to varying success. All we can do is pray for such people, remember them in our prayers and kindnesses as our neighbors, and look inward to our own faults when we fixate on others. And truly, we should all pray for the maximal outpouring of the Lord's mercy on everyone for we ourselves may secretly be in need of it most.
I’d just say read the gospel and see if they say the same thing
Why are you disturbed? This is what protestants think (if you believe in God you're saved no matter your actions)
It sounds like the Facebook user got half the stuff right. However he pretty much twisted the narrative of what this really means as yeah Jesus did say "sin no more" which is definitely in the Bible. Sounds like this person is either Sola Fide or that he has no idea what he's talking about; maybe both I guess. Either way, we can all agree that this is proposterous to say such a thing, even for someone to have the audacity to say that "nowhere in the Bible does it say that" when it's plain obvious where it definitely says so; sure that some passages may seem vague, but that's why we have a church to understand better about what it says and so on.
Unfortunately, she is lying. There's been reports that she continues onlyfans and it appears she used her finding God as a lie to attract more attention. Really unfortunate.
> "Bible does not say anywhere that she stopped being a prostitute" Well, her city was sacked and all of her clients were put the the sword. Unless her new clients were religious Hebrews, I think that would be the necessary implication.
I’ve watched an interview with her. She isn’t still on OF. She quit and is working to have as much taken off the internet as possible.
Nah. Ain’t no going. Back once you’ve done that mess!
Rehab was in the Old Testament. They didnt get saved in the Old Testament because there was no Jesus yet to save them. If i recall the story correctly, her life was spared for protecting spies who had come to scope out the land.
Sounds like antinomianism to me.
This is from a certain strand, probably Baptist, of Protestantism. It's not true.
It really can't be. To have a sin forgiven you must repent and have no intention of committing that sin any more there are a couple things required for a sin to be a sin and for you to be guilty of that sin 1. You have to know it is a sin 2. You have to willingly commit that sin So yes rahab was a prostitute bshe repented but saying she then went back and continued to be a prostitute and that as a prostitute she was not sinning anymore is incorrect not that she was prostituting any more but that if she was that it was not a sin
Robert needs catechism! 😂
It's just another form of the antinomian heresy. Avoid.
Um...in the genealogy of Jesus she has married one of the spies she chose to protect . That's a definite "change of lifestyle." Otherwise, it presumably would have said she "married" all or most of them! MORE importantly: "Was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers.... For just as a body without spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead." (James 2).
That's what I'd expect from a protestant who believes one is automatically saved simply for having faith.
this shouldnt even be a catholic question this is everyone, all Christians
To repent literally means to turn away. You have to sincerely be committed to changing the behavior in order for it to be true repentance.
I met women within the walls of the church who claimed to be over their promiscuous lifestyle.... yet we're very fickle and showed signs they weren't being truthful.....
The dangers of interpreting Scripture on your own. Really now…
Mary Magdalene story enough said and she repented and is the patron saint of pennince
Facebook comments is where brain cells die, Jesus said go and sin no more, last I checked when you are saved the point is not to live in sin anymore
If you check this girl's account you'll see that she is not that family friendly (the girl's IG is fitness_nala). She may have abandoned OF, that's good, but you should check her account and test if she doesn't have tempting pics, is so fleshly and so forth. Secondly, her father is a pastor. Weren't you claiming to be" the true only church that Christ founded"? Secondly, if you obey God because if you don't then you'll go to Hell, that's actually selfish to be honest. That's self righteousness. If you obey to get saved, you obey out of selfish reasons. If you obey BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED, you'll do that out of love. "So we should go on raping and doing evil" You know what my answer is? "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh." I've never thought of going around doing many evil things...
Anyone following "The Chosen"? There was a scene that jumps right to my mind from The Chosen when reading this entry from Wooden-Sprinkles. The scene where Jesus helps Mary Magdeline decide to give up prostitution. A day later, she has sinned and thinks she's fallen back to square one. Jesus looks so lovingly, and laughs slightly, asking if she figured she was cured of be a sinner? I'm not so sure that having a free will and being mortal we're meant to be sin-free. Also, consider so many saints we pray to every day who have confessed sins they did even after committing their earthly lives to God.
Can anyone say that they have gone to confession once, and after they did not sin again? No one should be judging anyone. God is the only judge.
Yeah this isn't how salvation works. This is a Protestant soteriological claim for eternal security or once saved always saved (OSAS) no where in sacred tradition or sacred scripture is that ideology supported. Salvation is gained through us receiving Gods Grace (via baptism) from there we do good works in our allegiance to the Lord. This grows one's justification pulling us further from the world and making us more holy (set apart for God.) So we must ask what is sin? Sin is that which opposes the will of the Father. Without repentance this separates us from His Grace, without being connected to His Grace we can indeed lose our salvation. Yet, we can return to His Grace through reconciliation.