A witness to Hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dpoc41
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I got the idea from the whole ‘Original Sin’ concept. I got it from the teaching that in my natural state, without seeking and asking God’s forgiveness, without accepting Jesus’ sacrifice for my sins, and without taking any proactive actions in this regard, the default value is eternal damnation of my soul.
Original Sin doesn’t mean that’s the original state in which everything was made, it means that Adam’s sin is the root of our own sin and death today. In fact part of what makes Original Sin such a powerful evil is percisly because the “default” or natural state of creation was grace and perfection.

Adam did not have a fallen nature at creation like we did, rather like Mary (more directly like Christ though Christ is God and not created) Adam was created in a state of grace. He did not have a natural tendancy to sin like we do, rather he chose Satan over God completely of his own free will. Thus all of man kind, which decends from Adam and Eve, suffers the effects of the fall.
 
Refusing God’s love, not accepting Christ sacrifice, or trying to “opt out” is a decision. There is no default. We choose to accept or we choose not accept. Ignoring the offer of redemption from our “original sin” is an active choice, not a passive one. Ignoring the dilemma, or refusing to make a choice is a choice in iteself.

God gave us existence, an eternal soul. We can’t change that. What we choose to do about it is up to us. Choosing to ignore it is a choice, not a default.

That is how going to hell and “opting out” are the same thing…
I’ve been down this logic path before, and don’t agree with it.

I am also familiar with Pascal’s Wager, and ask if it only applies to your God, or should Pascal’s Wager be applied to all gods?
 
Original Sin doesn’t mean that’s the original state in which everything was made, it means that Adam’s sin is the root of our own sin and death today. In fact part of what makes Original Sin such a powerful evil is percisly because the “default” or natural state of creation was grace and perfection.

Adam did not have a fallen nature at creation like we did, rather like Mary (more directly like Christ though Christ is God and not created) Adam was created in a state of grace. He did not have a natural tendancy to sin like we do, rather he chose Satan over God completely of his own free will. Thus all of man kind, which decends from Adam and Eve, suffers the effects of the fall.
I understand what you’re saying. Let me ask you this - If Adam did not have the knowledge of good and evil before he ate from the tree, in what sense is he to be held accountable for his actions?
 
I understand what you’re saying. Let me ask you this - If Adam did not have the knowledge of good and evil before he ate from the tree, in what sense is he to be held accountable for his actions?
Genesis Chapter 2 answers this explicitly:

drbo.org/chapter/01002.htm
16 And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat: 17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.
Not eating of the tree of the knowlege of good and evil was (the first) explicit commandment of God. It should have been enough for Adam that God commanded it, there was no need to understand good or evil. Thus Adam is accountable for his sin, as we are all.
 
Genesis Chapter 2 answers this explicitly:

drbo.org/chapter/01002.htm

Not eating of the tree of the knowlege of good and evil was (the first) explicit commandment of God. It should have been enough for Adam that God commanded it, there was no need to understand good or evil. Thus Adam is accountable for his sin, as we are all.
I understand what you’re saying. Thing is, Adam had absolutely no reference point to death. None, whatsoever. And, where was God when Eve was first tempted, or when Adam was first tempted by Eve? (Separated already?) Why wasn’t God there to shew away the serpent in the first place? How can you put someone to the test if they have no clue of right and wrong? Is it fair to invoke the “free will” clause on individuals who don’t know good from evil? If a similar scenario occurred today, where a parent left a toddler alone in the house, and the toddler got into the cleaning supplies and died as the result, the parent would go to prison for neglectful homicide!

I’d like to delve into this aspect a bit further, but feel its derailing from the OP topic.
 
I understand what you’re saying. Thing is, Adam had absolutely no reference point to death. None, whatsoever. And, where was God when Eve was first tempted, or when Adam was first tempted by Eve? (Separated already?) Why wasn’t he there to shew away the serpent in the first place? How can you put someone to the test if they have no clue of right and wrong? Is it fair to invoke the “free will” clause on individuals who don’t know good from evil? If a similar scenario occurred today, where a parent left a toddler alone in the house, and the toddler got into the cleaning supplies and died as the result, the parent would go to prison for neglectful homicide!

I’d like to delve into this aspect a bit further, but feel its derailing from the OP topic.
Perhaps you should go on to read Genesis Chapter 3:

drbo.org/chapter/01003.htm
1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? 2 And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. 4 And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. 5 For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.
It is clear here that not only Adam, but specifically Eve also knew what death meant. God gave Adam and Eve a clear commandment, and using language they clearly understood he placed a clear punishment upon the sin of eating the fruit.

I hope this clears the matter up for you.
 
I’ve been down this logic path before, and don’t agree with it.

I am also familiar with Pascal’s Wager, and ask if it only applies to your God, or should Pascal’s Wager be applied to all gods?
I’m glad you’ve heard of this before, if we are understanding each other. I respectfully suggest that it doesn’t matter if you agree with it. It’s usually very difficult for believers and non-believers (which I am assuming by your “none” in religious affiliation…correct me if I’m wrong!) to debate/discuss topics like this because the starting points and foundations of knowledge are radically different.

Logic is a very powerful tool, and very useful. However, it is possible to transcend logic. Logic cannot transcend transcendence.

I’m not too keen on Pascal or his wager. I prefer to deal with certainties. In answer to your question, there is only one God.

I used to debate and discuss with atheists on these things periodically, and it can be fun, but it is just as often frustrating, especially when you start caring enough about their souls to try to convince them…which is mostly impossible. I’m sure you know you can’t prove or disprove God with logic. In several thousand years of logical inquiry, no one has come close. It’s unlikely any further conversation will change things. That’s why I’ve stopped arguing so much in these cases.

Because you seem intelligent, and are not simply beating up on believers (like some non-believers do in forums like this) I’ll go out on a limb and say the purpose of coming to a religious forum is out of curiosity or maybe to see if anything can be learned. There is something to be learned in this thread, for sure. In its reading, consider yourself informed, and forwarned.

I mean this in the best way possible! 😃

“He who has ears, let him hear.”
 
Perhaps you should go on to read Genesis Chapter 3:

drbo.org/chapter/01003.htm

It is clear here that not only Adam, but specifically Eve also knew what death meant. God gave Adam and Eve a clear commandment, and using language they clearly understood he placed a clear punishment upon the sin of eating the fruit.

I hope this clears the matter up for you.
I’m well versed in Genesis. Tell me where Adam and Eve had knowledge of physical or spiritual death before eating from the tree. What reference point did they have to work from? And, how could they have made decisions to avoid the death, (decisions based on the knowledge of good and evil), before they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

BTW, I apologize to the OP. Perhaps a mod can split this to another thread?
 
I’m well versed in Genesis. Tell me where Adam and Eve had knowledge of physical or spiritual death before eating from the tree. What reference point did they have to work from? And, how could they have made decisions to avoid the death, (decisions based on the knowledge of good and evil), before they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

BTW, I apologize to the OP. Perhaps a mod can split this to another thread?
Why don’t you just start your own?
 
I’m glad you’ve heard of this before, if we are understanding each other. I respectfully suggest that it doesn’t matter if you agree with it. It’s usually very difficult for believers and non-believers to debate/discuss topics like this because the starting points and foundations of knowledge are radically different.

Logic is a very powerful tool, and very useful. However, it is possible to transcend logic. Logic cannot transcend transcendence.

I’m not too keen on Pascal or his wager. I prefer to deal with certainties. In answer to your question, there is only one God.

I used to debate and discuss with atheists periodically, and it can be fun, but it is just as often frustrating, especially when you start caring enough about their souls to try to convince them…which is mostly impossible. I’m sure you know you can’t prove or disprove God with logic. In several thousand years of logical inquiry, no one has come close. It’s unlikely any further conversation will change things. That’s why I’ve stopped arguing so much in these cases.

Because you seem intelligent, and are not simply beating up on believers (like some non-believers do in forums like this) I’ll go out on a limb and say the purpose of coming to a religious forum is out of curiosity or maybe to see if anything can be learned. There is something to be learned in this thread, for sure. In its reading, consider yourself informed, and forwarned.

I mean this in the best way possible! 😃

“He who has ears, let him hear.”
Thanks, Garyjohn2.

I used to argue with atheists, too. And I know how frustrated I used to get with some of them. I think the key to a lot of it was in the approach and attitude towards those we don’t agree with. I think that was 99% of the battle.

I’m a pretty laid back guy. My philosophy is that if religion gives someone a peaceful heart and a meaningful life, more power to them. No one should deny them that. I’m not here to change anyone’s mind. I’m here only to give my own perspective on things, and perhaps open new lines of inquiry. I, too, am learning from everyone else here.
 
Back to the ‘hell’ topic -

To me, the notion of an infinite punishment, for what amounts to less than a blink of an eye in eternity, seems egregiously excessive.
 
Back to the ‘hell’ topic -

To me, the notion of an infinite punishment, for what amounts to less than a blink of an eye in eternity, seems egregiously excessive.
Not to me, if you don’t want to be with God, and never will want to be with God then hell seems like the perfect solution to me.
 
This is very good reading for me, in that I’m going to confession in about three hours. I’ve read also today in CA about the different types of contrition. I feel so guilty and that’s good. It’s when the guilt is gone, that it’s easy for me to forget that guilt as well as that mercy shown to me on the cross and on the alter during the Mass afterwards. God bless:(:(😦
 
I’m sure you know you can’t prove or disprove God with logic.
Agreed.

The existence of a God cannot be proven or falsified. The further problem is that God is not measurable or falsifiable. Which means that people believe in these different deities because they want to. That’s mostly a product of where they were born. Don’t you think its a remarkable coincidence that most people generally follow the religion of their parents, and that theirs is the right one, the right god, and the right set of practices? It may not convert me, but I’d sure stand up and pay attention if the OP story were coming from a devout Hindu, born and raised of Hindu parents and ancestry, and living in a remote part of India. That would definitely get my attention! :eek:
 
👍
I understand what you’re saying. Thing is, Adam had absolutely no reference point to death. None, whatsoever. And, where was God when Eve was first tempted, or when Adam was first tempted by Eve? (Separated already?) Why wasn’t God there to shew away the serpent in the first place? How can you put someone to the test if they have no clue of right and wrong? Is it fair to invoke the “free will” clause on individuals who don’t know good from evil? If a similar scenario occurred today, where a parent left a toddler alone in the house, and the toddler got into the cleaning supplies and died as the result, the parent would go to prison for neglectful homicide!

I’d like to delve into this aspect a bit further, but feel its derailing from the OP topic.
Mr. Skeptic, I say bless your heart for being in a CAF… If you weren’t “searching” for something, and you were OK w/ living your life as an athiest - As I said - You wouldn’t be on this forum. I’m very happy living my life as a Christian/Catholic, and the thought of going onto an athiest website actually takes my breath away…
 
👍

Mr. Skeptic, I say bless your heart for being in a CAF…
Thank you for the warm greetings.
If you weren’t “searching” for something, and you were OK w/ living your life as an athiest - As I said - You wouldn’t be on this forum.
IOW - you can’t personally think of any other reason for me being here. That’s called the “argument from incredulity” fallacy. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top