All we have to do is Love?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarkA16
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MarkA16

Guest
Is all we have to do is Love? Learn to love the right way. Is this how non-Christians (Buddhist, Hindu, Islam, etc) get to heaven? God is Love, and if anyone learns to love the real way, they are destined to heaven? When people read, “non-Christians go to hell” they make a big deal out of it because they don’t know the full meaning. and that the bottom line is that anyone can get to heaven just as long as you love, because God is love. So, caveman could go to heaven because he might have loved his family? 🙂

You know, God = Love, Devil = Hate.

God Bless 🙂
 
Problem is — humans don’t know what real love is.

The Church infuses real love into your heart through her teachings and the Sacraments. The Eucharist, the true Heart of the Church and the true Heart of Christ is the pinnacle of that love.

God Bless!
 
Problem is — humans don’t know what real love is.
Yeah, that’s why I show love towards my buddhist, islam, and atheist friends without mentioning God or of anything in Christianity or trying to convert, hoping that my love towards them would shape them into loving people and understand what love is.

Bravo? 🙂
 
We are to love, know and serve God in this world so we can be with him in the next world.

If anyone goes to heaven outside the church, it will because of the blood of Jesus, whether they realize it or not.

But Love would be strong indicator of their searching for the true God.
 
The Church infuses real love into your heart through her teachings and the Sacraments. The Eucharist, the true Heart of the Church and the true Heart of Christ is the pinnacle of that love.
But one who is unfamiliar with that can still go to heaven because they share love to others? Can we who live the Word, share the Word without forcing people to convert, thus them being unfamiliar with the Sacraments, Eucharist, etc, but tell them that all you need is to love?

Like my chemistry teacher, who is a skeptic, he is a good man, but because he is a science teacher he “has” to be a skeptic. I thank God for scientists, because they help me understand God better. 🙂
If anyone goes to heaven outside the church, it will because of the blood of Jesus, whether they realize it or not.
Yes. They don’t realize that I (am?) want to spread the Love of God.
 
St Augustine said ‘love and do what you will’.

There I believe lies the key 👍
 
**The Biblical definition of love is found in II John 6 “this is love (agape) that we walk after his commandments”

There is no word in the New Testament Greek for our word love. We have incorporated several Greek words into our English word “love”. We have confused and misused two of these Greek words: agape and phileo. They are both translated “love” in the New Testament. The word phileo (love) means to be affectionate. Men corrupt the word agape (love) when they quote the Bible and imply that agape is affection.

John said, “God is love (agape)”. Jesus said we are to love (agapeo - verb form of agape) our neighbor and our enemy (Mark 12:31; Matt. 5:44). He was not saying that we are to be affectionate (phileo) to them. He was saying that we are to “God” (agapeo) them, since God is love (agape). We are to give our neighbor and our enemy all that God is --his instruction.

When we love (agape) our enemies we feed them the only food that is legal (prescribed) for sheep to consume (the law - instruction in God’s word). The Lord defined legal food for his people when he said to Adam, “You may eat of all the trees of the garden except – (Gen. 2:16,17)”. Love (agape) is feeding on the word of God. We love (agape) others when we fellowship (eating at the Lord’s “spiritual” table) with them, as we instruct in God’s word. To love (agape) does not mean to show affection (phileo) to them, but rather to give them the truth of God’s word. “All the law (nomos - legal food - instruction) is fulfilled (finished or accomplished) in one word – thou shalt love (agapeo - give God’s instruction) thy neighbor (Gal. 5:14).” “Love (agape) worketh no ill (evil) to “his” (agape is the person, God) neighbor: therefore love (agape) is the fulfilling of the law (Rom. 13:10).” God is not affection (phileo). He is instruction in truth. “Thy word (instruction) is truth (John 17:17).” There will be a shortage of love (agape) at the end of time. Jesus said, "because iniquity (unlawful food) shall abound, the love (agape - instruction in the word) of many shall wax cold (Matt. 24:12; Amos 8:11,12).**
 
Plain and simple yes love is essential, but just like faith, love with out works is dead. I mean if you treat somebody terribly can you in the same breathe say you love them? Its a textbook case of a contrary opposition. So thats where the pratice of morals comes in. You prove your love by following his commandments. Thats the basis of what Protestants call the Catholic Legal System. (And as a side note, confession is like writting a hand written letter to a friend as an appology for treating the freind bad, sure you could jot down a quick email full of net lingo but how sincere is that)
 
Is all we have to do is Love? Learn to love the right way. Is this how non-Christians (Buddhist, Hindu, Islam, etc) get to heaven? God is Love, and if anyone learns to love the real way, they are destined to heaven? When people read, “non-Christians go to hell” they make a big deal out of it because they don’t know the full meaning. and that the bottom line is that anyone can get to heaven just as long as you love, because God is love. So, caveman could go to heaven because he might have loved his family? 🙂

You know, God = Love, Devil = Hate.

God Bless 🙂
No, people receive sanctifying grace (salvation) if they respond affirmatively to actual graces extended to them by the Holy Spirit. Yes, this could include a caveman, if that were the case.

However, we are not saved by works. We are saved by grace through faith and works. Works alone, even love, cannot save. A caveman cannot be saved merely because he loved his family. It really depends upon what the Holy Spirit is doing in the heart of an individual and how that individual is responding to God. This is a very private matter, and there is no way we can know what is going on between God and a non-Christian.

The salvation of those who are formally outside of the Church is the exception to the rule, so to speak. The road to eternal life is narrow and few find it. The further one gets from the fullness of Christianity (the Catholic Church) the more risky things become. It would be a mistake to say that the gospel is simply that we love. We are expected to preach the full gospel which is faith in and obedience to Christ. Those that don’t get the message will be judged fairly by God.
 
No, people receive sanctifying grace (salvation) if they respond affirmatively to actual graces extended to them by the Holy Spirit. Yes, this could include a caveman, if that were the case.

However, we are not saved by works. We are saved by grace through faith and works. Works alone, even love, cannot save. A caveman cannot be saved merely because he loved his family. It really depends upon what the Holy Spirit is doing in the heart of an individual and how that individual is responding to God. This is a very private matter, and there is no way we can know what is going on between God and a non-Christian.

The salvation of those who are formally outside of the Church is the exception to the rule, so to speak. The road to eternal life is narrow and few find it. The further one gets from the fullness of Christianity (the Catholic Church) the more risky things become. It would be a mistake to say that the gospel is simply that we love. We are expected to preach the full gospel which is faith in and obedience to Christ. Those that don’t get the message will be judged fairly by God.
Where did you get this?
 
Where did you get this?
Lumen Gentium.
(Chapter 2.16)Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life.
The key here is that the individual cooperates with God’s grace. Apart from God’s grace, works mean nothing.
 
Hello Mark,

In Mathew 10:5 Jesus tells His disciples not to even go to the pagan towns or a Samaritan town, but instead go to the twelve tribes of Israel.

In Luke 10:25 Jesus is asked, What must I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus answer is to do as the Good Samaritan has done.

The lawyer asking the question, (“who wanted to justify himself”) was no doubt a God authorized Church leader. The lawyer, no doubt, would have been a firm believer that one must be a circumsized Jew to go to heaven. Jesus (no doubt, suspecting selfrighteousness in the Church leader asking the qestion) uses God authorized Church leaders (similiar in authority to Catholic Popes and Bishops) as the ones who failed to love. Jesus using a Samaritan to describe who has the love of neighbor needed to inherit eternal life was no doubt a multimegaton nuclear bomb shell detonated in God authorized Church leader theology.

An understanding which comes to me, with Jesus intentionally selecting a Samaritan, while shunning God authorized Church leaders, to describe the love of neighbor needed to go to heaven, is that we should never decide who Jesus will not let into heaven.
 
If we loved perfectly, we would of course know God who is Love, follow God perfectly and accept God’s grace perfectly, and thus have no problem being saved by God and going to Heaven.

But that original sin thing makes it somewhat difficult to love perfectly… 🙂

Still, it is certainly true that someone who loves is close to God. But it would be a pity if such a person never got a chance to become Christian, know the grace of the sacraments, and learn all the exciting truth we learn from the Bible. Ideally, you want both.

Of course, if you’re already Christian and you don’t love, you’re not really using that gift of faith to your benefit. (Cue parable of the talents, the bit about burying money in the ground.) If you screw up, you’ve really got no excuse; you had it all and wasted it. But if you love and aren’t Christian, it’s like you’re in the hole in the ground – blind to the light, the Word muffled from your ears. It would be a lot better to dig your way up to the surface, or be dug up by some friendly evangelist.

Only with Love and knowledge of the Truth would you truly be free.

Have I mixed my metaphors enough yet?
 
Love is not so much about what we can get from the world but what we can give the world.

It is true to say ‘by giving we receive’ but it is about selfish love: What can I give the world for which I expect no repayment

What can I give to God.
 
I didn’t notice this thread before, but I just started a new one about the ecumenical movement that has caused these current beliefs that “all we need is Love”. I have been a believer in this until recently, and now feel confirmed after reading former dogma defined that is quite the opposite.

Pope Pius IX infallibly defined in his Syllabus of Errors that the following are errors…

III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM
  1. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.
  2. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. – Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846.
  3. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. – Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
  4. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. – Encyclical “Noscitis,” Dec. 8, 1849.
It seems like a pleasant idea to strive for utopia on earth, but it’s not God’s will. This makes sense considering what Christ said: “I come not to bring peace upon the earth, but a sword”.
 
I didn’t notice this thread before, but I just started a new one about the ecumenical movement that has caused these current beliefs that “all we need is Love”. I have been a believer in this until recently, and now feel confirmed after reading former dogma defined that is quite the opposite.

Pope Pius IX infallibly defined in his Syllabus of Errors that the following are errors…

III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM
  1. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.
  2. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. – Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846.
  3. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. – Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
  4. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. – Encyclical “Noscitis,” Dec. 8, 1849.
It seems like a pleasant idea to strive for utopia on earth, but it’s not God’s will. This makes sense considering what Christ said: “I come not to bring peace upon the earth, but a sword”.
I was just corrected: This was not an infallable teaching.
 
Pope Pius IX infallibly defined in his Syllabus of Errors that the following are errors…

III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM
  1. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.
  2. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. – Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846.
  3. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. – Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
  4. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. – Encyclical “Noscitis,” Dec. 8, 1849.
It
Should Pope John Paul II December 6,2000, non-excathadra, statement on the subject be added to Pope Pius IX list of errors?
The following is a quote of Pope John Paul II’s statement in English to those gathered in St. Peter’s square on Wednesday, December 6th, 2000, in which he briefly summarized his message of the day, “FOR US, THE KINGDOM IS GRACE”:

“Dear brothers and sisters, the theme of Our general audience during this great Jubilee year, has been the glory of the Trinity, and today we ask what we must do to ensure that the glory of the Trinity shines forth more fully in the world. In essence we are called to be converted and to believe in the Gospel. We are to accept the kingdom of God in our hearts, and to bear witness to it by word and deed. The kingdom indicates the loving presence and activity of God in the world and should be a source of serenity and confidence to our lives. The Gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the beatitudes: the poor in spirit; the pure in heart; those who will lovingly [endure] the sufferings of life; will enter God’s kingdom. All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and His Church, contribute under the influence of grace, to the building of this kingdom. In the Lord’s prayer we say ‘Thy kingdom come’. May this be the hope that sustains us and inspires our Christian life and world.”

We confess with the Apostle Paul “that there is salvation in no other name” (Acts 4:12). The “Dominus Iesus” declaration, in the wake of Vatican II, shows that with this the salvation of non-Christians is not denied, but explains its ultimate source in Christ, in whom God and man are united. God gives light to all in a way appropriate to their interior and environmental situation, granting them saving grace through ways known to him (see “Dominus Iesus,” VI, 20-21). The document clarifies the essential Christian elements, which do not obstruct the dialogue, but show its basis, because a dialogue without foundations would be destined to degenerate into empty verbosity.

Normally, “it will be in the sincere practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and by following the dictates of their own conscience that the members of other religions respond positively to God’s invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even while they do not recognize or acknowledge him as their Saviour (cf. Ad gentes, nn. 3, 9, 11)” (Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue – Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples,

The Church Teaches Ex Cathadra:
"The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, and heretics, and schismatics, can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire “which was prepared for the devil, and his angels,” (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441)
 
Should Pope John Paul II December 6,2000, non-excathadra, statement on the subject be added to Pope Pius IX list of errors?
The following is a quote of Pope John Paul II’s statement in English to those gathered in St. Peter’s square on Wednesday, December 6th, 2000, in which he briefly summarized his message of the day, “FOR US, THE KINGDOM IS GRACE”:

“Dear brothers and sisters, the theme of Our general audience during this great Jubilee year, has been the glory of the Trinity, and today we ask what we must do to ensure that the glory of the Trinity shines forth more fully in the world. In essence we are called to be converted and to believe in the Gospel. We are to accept the kingdom of God in our hearts, and to bear witness to it by word and deed. The kingdom indicates the loving presence and activity of God in the world and should be a source of serenity and confidence to our lives. The Gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the beatitudes: the poor in spirit; the pure in heart; those who will lovingly [endure] the sufferings of life; will enter God’s kingdom. All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and His Church, contribute under the influence of grace, to the building of this kingdom. In the Lord’s prayer we say ‘Thy kingdom come’. May this be the hope that sustains us and inspires our Christian life and world.”

We confess with the Apostle Paul “that there is salvation in no other name” (Acts 4:12). The “Dominus Iesus” declaration, in the wake of Vatican II, shows that with this the salvation of non-Christians is not denied, but explains its ultimate source in Christ, in whom God and man are united. God gives light to all in a way appropriate to their interior and environmental situation, granting them saving grace through ways known to him (see “Dominus Iesus,” VI, 20-21). The document clarifies the essential Christian elements, which do not obstruct the dialogue, but show its basis, because a dialogue without foundations would be destined to degenerate into empty verbosity.

Normally, “it will be in the sincere practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and by following the dictates of their own conscience that the members of other religions respond positively to God’s invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even while they do not recognize or acknowledge him as their Saviour (cf. Ad gentes, nn. 3, 9, 11)” (Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue – Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples,

The Church Teaches Ex Cathadra:
"The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, and heretics, and schismatics, can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire “which was prepared for the devil, and his angels,” (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441)
Thank you for posting this. I’m so confused. These ideas can’t be more opposed to one another. Do you have any personal commentary on this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top