Be Warned & Believe what you Truly Will

[Shike]

No where is it expressly declared that if one does not truly believe a Hell exists that he or she is damned to hell itself.

Of course not. But realize this is a different point than the Church not teaching that hell exists. The Catholic Church does teach that hell exists. And the Catholic church doesn’t teach that someone who disbelieves in hell will necessarily go to hell.

Do you really believe Shike that any argument a Christian would have who actively believes in hell , would have success, in dissuading an active mob intent on burning someone to death for God?

I don’t know if it’s a language thing, but I have a really hard time understanding your English. Please slow down and spell things out… very… slowly.

So are you saying: pretend that there is Bob. Bob is a Christian and Bob believes in hell. There is an angry mob about to burn someone at the stake. Is the mob Christian, Muslim, Jewish… you do not say. But Bob needs to persuade the mob not burn someone at the stake. So what… ?

What is this connection that you see between the doctrine of hell and burning someone at the stake? And what does “RC” stand for. Reformed Calvinist?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well its very simple. God is the ultimate Creator. Theres really no such thing as a great creation of art without a signature. Jesus said…" to know me is to know the Father"

Did Jesus go about his life burning people at the steak? I don’t think so.

Belief is necessary as we are only human and must recognize in the virtue of true humility
that we can grow weak and falter. Inspiration in the example of love and peace in The Son of God is a reality in human need.

If a person gives 10 bucks into the help the poor basket each week because he is following a program which would otherwise not be in effect…he or she is acting out of fear,NOT genuine compassion.
Genuine compassion is what Jesus is all about.
One CANNOT have genuine compassion with an idi amin torture chamber in mind as
God is simply not idi amin…sorry:thumbsup:

( will be back later tonight after a work related appointment in case I missed any of the interesting entries.) All will be logical:thumbsup: I can easily see this thread is most neccesary

It is necessary, but it’s not because you’re correct and we who are following Christ and His Church aren’t. Precisely the opposite --this thread is needed in order to help **you **see the error of your mistaken opinions. Feel free to peruse the library tracts – I notice you don’t seek to address them or to go ‘point by point’ with authentic Catholic teaching but merely to keep hammering away with your opinion, plus the obligatory 'if you disagree with my beliefs you are painting God as a torturer and thus obviously you’re wrong and I’m right". . .

And of course, the only person coming up with Idi Amin and torture chambers is YOU.

IOW, you’re making strawman arguments just to knock them down instead of addressing the actual Catholic teachings.

What exactly is wrong with the teachings on hell as listed either from the post I made above directly from the Library here, or with the teachings as stated in the Catechism?

Feel free to take my post from “The Hell There is” and to counter with direct, umambiguous, 2000 year tradition/teaching which gives your ‘points’ as authentic teaching of the Catholic Church. If you can’t do so, explain why we should follow YOU instead of the Church and by whose authority you claim to teach a different ‘Truth’ than Christ’s Church.

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Immature comments will be exposed as such. Attempting to gather acceptance using my carefully thought out thread with sarcasm is uncharitable, immature, and most of all a reflection of how one considers the active thoughts of others

Laughing disconnects conscious thought.

I believe that the entity called satan is another topic which I will look forward to discussing if
so inspired. I never am oddly enough inspired to consider the nothingness of nothingness or
deceit itself interesting enough to lend more propaganda to its security in creation.
The prince of darkness is another subject.

Also, as a child growing up Catholic, and of course remaining Catholic, I have NEVER believed or considered the idea of hell to inspire my spirit. Never believed it existed.
I can remember as a pre schooler.

If there is a reason to choose belief in the existence of hell, I would like to see it.

I have NEVER met a Priest who advises that a good Catholic who has trouble believing this place actually exists is damned to hell forever. Therefore the teaching is only part and not an implicit requisite. This is logical

Therefore, I am simply trying to iron out , why people choose to believe in hell . Comfortable “expectation” in another’s misery in an infinite torment is “absolute ill -will”
What we expect by choice, is what we desire. That is a rule of life which I did not…make up !

 

[FurtherSuntime]

It is necessary, but it’s not because you’re correct and we who are following Christ and His Church aren’t. Precisely the opposite --this thread is needed in order to help **you **see the error of your mistaken opinions. Feel free to peruse the library tracts – I notice you don’t seek to address them or to go ‘point by point’ with authentic Catholic teaching but merely to keep hammering away with your opinion, plus the obligatory 'if you disagree with my beliefs you are painting God as a torturer and thus obviously you’re wrong and I’m right". . .

And of course, the only person coming up with Idi Amin and torture chambers is YOU.

IOW, you’re making strawman arguments just to knock them down instead of addressing the actual Catholic teachings.

What exactly is wrong with the teachings on hell as listed either from the post I made above directly from the Library here, or with the teachings as stated in the Catechism?

Feel free to take my post from “The Hell There is” and to counter with direct, umambiguous, 2000 year tradition/teaching which gives your ‘points’ as authentic teaching of the Catholic Church. If you can’t do so, explain why we should follow YOU instead of the Church and by whose authority you claim to teach a different ‘Truth’ than Christ’s Church.

Ok…I see the post …I will make my comment and maybe there will be progress

 

[ahs]

So…

.“And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. . .” (Matthew 5:29 KJV) (Jesus goes on in the same vein about the right hand.)

If one does not pluck the eye out, how can it be factually determined that salvation is without possibility in atonement…? It cannot.

Since it cannot be determined …the casting into hell mentioned above, can ONLY be, the on-going human torment within the life itself.in the state of sin. I don’t believe this can be argued.

A clear ratification in the location to be, a living condition of anxiety (hell) .Not an eternal torture chamber which would be favored among the ignorant ancient people of the time and as we can see our present time. A direct understanding by Jesus himself.

All who embrace Hell are not in Communion with God…I can see this is a most neccesary thread

This is just your personal interpretation of scripture, which is contrary to Church teaching. And you personal interpretation is forbidden by the very source you are quoting: 2Pet1:20 “Understaning this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.”

If a person gives 10 bucks into the help the poor basket each week because he is following a program which would otherwise not be in effect…he or she is acting out of fear,NOT genuine compassion.
Genuine compassion is what Jesus is all about.
One CANNOT have genuine compassion with an idi amin torture chamber in mind as
God is simply not idi amin…sorry:thumbsup:

That is an assumption that you cannot defend. If I give money in the collection plate, it is due to concern for the poor and for the good of the Church. It has nothing to do with fear. I CAN have genuine compassion with hell on my mind.

Also, as a child growing up Catholic, and of course remaining Catholic, I have NEVER believed or considered the idea of hell to inspire my spirit. Never believed it existed.

The fact that you don’t believe doesn’t make it suddenly go away. Just because you don’t believe does not mean it does not exist. Hell does not need to inspire your spirit to exist.

I’m interested to know how you plan on defending your interpretation of the above scripture verse, when your personal interpretation, which is contrary to the Church, is forbidden by the very source you used to quote from.

ahs

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Further Suntime: I think I understand what you’re saying, and it is certainly true that the Catholic Church has never authoritatively stated that anybody is in hell (any person that is, not even Judas) though I believe The Church definitely states that Satan is there. So obviously at least one ‘being’ (though pure spirit) does inhabit some ‘place’ whether that is physical or something ‘beyond’ physical which again according to the definition of the Church is the ‘absence of God’ (and that through personal choice).

Where I think you’re veering off is that you are visualizing or conceptualizing Hell as a place of torment (which in fact it is) but that you are focused on the ‘torment’ aspect of it and ignoring the ‘choice’ aspect. I mean, think of a Brazilian wax (ouch). Not what I would personally choose but many women do. . .freely, despite the pain. So there must be something ‘beyond’ the mere physical pain which is ‘worth’ that pain. Just so, there is something beyond the ‘torment’ of hell which is ‘worth it’ to the person who chooses it --and that something is, ironically enough, the kind of rejection of God’s will for an individual will which is in direct opposition to God’s will.

While it might seem hard to understand to those who seek to do God’s will, we can see many examples. Take the person who, though married, ‘falls in love’ with another person and commits adultery. That is not just a rejection of the spouse, it is a rejection of God, a betrayal of one’s wedding vows, a cooperation with sin on the part of the person who sins with a married person, etc. And that sin doesn’t just ‘stop’ once the sex is done. If unrepented, that sin exists in and through eternity, which is why hell, being eternal, is a just CONSEQUENCE. Not punishment but consequence.

The justice of hell is that it is eternal because the sin is eternal. The mercy is that the person still exists and not only that, exists in the full ‘enjoyment’ of having chosen HIS (or HER) own way. . .forever. The ‘torment’ is a consequence of both the justice and the mercy – justice demands that what was done wrong must be ‘paid for’, mercy keeps the punishment mere ‘physical pain’ and not annihilation.

Far from being Idi Amin or hell being a torture chamber unjustly forced on the merely temporal and ‘repentent’, it is a merciful and just consequence of unrepented mortal sin.

It is emphatically NOT what any Christian would wish to see another person choose. . .but we can’t be ostriches with heads on the sand or run around sticking our fingers in our ears LALALALALALA and pretending it just ‘doesn’t exist’ so that we don’t have to worry our little heads but just enjoy that ‘Grandpa God’ who just sits and wants us to ‘love’ (just an amorphous word which can mean ANYTHING and encompass anything, even two absolutely opposing concepts!) without any ‘worries’ of having done ‘wrong’. . .

 

[Shike]

Also, as a child growing up Catholic, and of course remaining Catholic, I have NEVER believed or considered the idea of hell to inspire my spirit.

That hell doesn’t “inspire your spirit” is not of primary importance here. What is important is to humbly follow the teachings of the Church. If one didn’t want to humbly follow the teachings of the Church, then I don’t know why that person would want to remain Catholic. And besides, if one’s own personal likes and dislikes were the criterion for doctrine, it does very well defeat the purpose of the Church… no?

As it stands, just because the Church doesn’t explicitly say someone will go to hell for not believing in hell… doesn’t mean that person won’t go to hell. I suppose it’s very possible that someone could disbelieve in hell and still go there anyways.

If there is a reason to choose belief in the existence of hell, I would like to see it.

Again, it’s not really something a Catholic can get rid of. And yes, there are very many reasons for accepting hell. There are many instances from scripture. We can talk about those if you want. There are also examples from the nature of free-will using philosophy & theology, which I will get to presently. But the most compelling reason to believe in hell as a Catholic is because Holy Mother Church cares for you and is the Church that Christ founded, the one meant to bring you safely into God’s arms.

God wants to make us saints. A saint is one who is fully alive and loves like God loves. A saint is also someone who loves God. God, because He is love, won’t force someone to love him. God respects our choices, because that is the only loving thing to do (in the end at least). So if someone after repeated invitations to love God, still refuses God and that someone makes up his mind that he never wants God to bother him ever, ever, ever, again and wants to make his decision final… then God just might respect that person’s decision. Eternal separation from God is hell. Whether it is a spatio-temporal reality or not might still be up for speculation. Regardless, it is a “place” (whether spatio-temporal or not) of extreme suffering. So the conclusion from all this is, strangely enough, that the existence of hell is necessitated by God’s love and the nature of free-will.

Comfortable “expectation” in another’s misery in an infinite torment is “absolute ill -will”

Again, this line of yours is mistaken, it does not follow logically from the belief in hell nor is it a position supported by the Church. Hell exists… but we can never know if someone will go there or not… we are not the judge; God is the judge.

Your position/questions are important, however, so I am glad you brought them up. Especially since there has been a popular movement in today’s culture to “get rid of hell”.

ciao,
Michael

 

[FurtherSuntime]

This is just your personal interpretation of scripture, which is contrary to Church teaching. And you personal interpretation is forbidden by the very source you are quoting: 2Pet1:20 “Understaning this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.”

That is an assumption that you cannot defend. If I give money in the collection plate, it is due to concern for the poor and for the good of the Church. It has nothing to do with fear. I CAN have genuine compassion with hell on my mind.

The fact that you don’t believe doesn’t make it suddenly go away. Just because you don’t believe does not mean it does not exist. Hell does not need to inspire your spirit to exist.

I’m interested to know how you plan on defending your interpretation of the above scripture verse, when your personal interpretation, which is contrary to the Church, is forbidden by the very source you used to quote from.

ahs

#1 comments made about the collection plate were following another posters thinking as premise. Therefore your rational is out of context.

#2 it is a well known fact that we as Catholics do not interpet scripture litterally. Therefore all
random admonishments are whimsical Also to be clear and in allowance for constructive progresss

I am in full agreement and comply with the codes of behavour set out by The Catholic Church my entire life.As such , I am a Catholic in good standing and in Comunion with the Pope. If someone wants to be immature and suggest what does RC stand for. and other cruel comments in order to gain popularity by means of creating a common villain, then they are not in Communion with my worthy Catholic Spiritual Effort and therefore not in Communion with the Pope himself.

Please submitt comments in a suitable fashion which adheres to our expected fellowship, which is crucial
to progress

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Here’s the start of the Library tract called “The Hell there Is” (sorry, my edit functions are squiffy today)

The doctrine of hell is so frightening that numerous heretical sects end up denying the reality of an eternal hell. The Unitarian-Universalists, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Christadelphians, the Christian Scientists, the Religious Scientists, the New Agers, and the Mormons—all have rejected or modified the doctrine of hell so radically that it is no longer a serious threat. In recent decades, this decay has even invaded mainstream Evangelicalism, and a number of major Evangelical figures have advocated the view that there is no eternal hell—the wicked will simply be annihilated.

But the eternal nature of hell is stressed in the New Testament. For example, in Mark 9:47–48 Jesus warns us, “*t is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, where the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.” And in Revelation 14:11, we read: “And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

Hell is not just a theoretical possibility. Jesus warns us that real people go there. He says, “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few” (Matt. 7:13–14).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church* states: “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs” (CCC 1035).
…

Part 1 in reply to above

Firstly, I am a Catholic who is not interested in propagating a new faith. I am simply confused as to why fellow Catholics choose to believe a hell exists when , choosing not to believe in such a horror chamber does not condemn the soul to hell.

Hell is not frightening to myself in any way what so ever because since I was a toddler I have never believed such a place would truly exist. So one cannot fit me in with the group above

The more life experience I have , the more I can see what Jesus was getting at when he said…we must become as children to enter the kingdom of heaven…so then I ask…what would children have to do with the acknowledgment of hell in eternity…? I think thats an awfully fair question.

I already addressed Mark 9:47-48 in post…once again for your convenience

."And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. . .
If one does not pluck the eye out, how can it be factually determined that salvation is without possibility in atonement…? It cannot.

Since it cannot be determined …the casting into hell mentioned above, can ONLY be, the on-going human torment within the life itself.in the state of sin. I don’t believe this can be argued.

A clear ratification in the location to be, a living condition of anxiety (hell) .Not an eternal torture chamber which would be favored among the ignorant ancient people of the time and as we can see our present time. A direct understanding by Jesus himself.

 

[Ahimsa]

Catholicism teaches that there is a hell.

However, Catholicism does not teach that any particular person is actually in hell.

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Here’s the start of the Library tract called “The Hell there Is” (sorry, my edit functions are squiffy today)

The doctrine of hell is so frightening that numerous heretical sects end up denying the reality of an eternal hell. The Unitarian-Universalists, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Christadelphians, the Christian Scientists, the Religious Scientists, the New Agers, and the Mormons—all have rejected or modified the doctrine of hell so radically that it is no longer a serious threat. In recent decades, this decay has even invaded mainstream Evangelicalism, and a number of major Evangelical figures have advocated the view that there is no eternal hell—the wicked will simply be annihilated.

But the eternal nature of hell is stressed in the New Testament. For example, in Mark 9:47–48 Jesus warns us, “*t is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, where the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.” And in Revelation 14:11, we read: “And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

Hell is not just a theoretical possibility. Jesus warns us that real people go there. He says, “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few” (Matt. 7:13–14).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church* states: “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs” (CCC 1035).
…

Destruction is the exact word Jesus uses, correct…? How can something that leads to destruction imply “eternal damnation” Once something is destroyed there is nothing left.
Logic is logic

Its simply not my fault that all of scripture suggests that the meaning in Hell used… is clearly
an understanding of presumed biological existence , withstanding a hellish existence.

Tomorrows another day.Thankyou for the thoughts and Peace

 

[coolduude]

I am in full agreement and comply with the codes of behavour set out by The Catholic Church my entire life.As such , I am a Catholic in good standing and in Comunion with the Pope.

This is a direct, verbatum, quote from the Chatecism:

“The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs” (CCC 1035).

THEREFORE, you can no longer both deny the existence of hell and still claim to be in communion with the Church. You MUST either renounce your dis-belief in hell OR leave the Church. There is no middle ground.

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Further Suntime: I think I understand what you’re saying, and it is certainly true that the Catholic Church has never authoritatively stated that anybody is in hell (any person that is, not even Judas) though I believe The Church definitely states that Satan is there. So obviously at least one ‘being’ (though pure spirit) does inhabit some ‘place’ whether that is physical or something ‘beyond’ physical which again according to the definition of the Church is the ‘absence of God’ (and that through personal choice).

Where I think you’re veering off is that you are visualizing or conceptualizing Hell as a place of torment (which in fact it is) but that you are focused on the ‘torment’ aspect of it and ignoring the ‘choice’ aspect. I mean, think of a Brazilian wax (ouch). Not what I would personally choose but many women do. . .freely, despite the pain. So there must be something ‘beyond’ the mere physical pain which is ‘worth’ that pain. Just so, there is something beyond the ‘torment’ of hell which is ‘worth it’ to the person who chooses it --and that something is, ironically enough, the kind of rejection of God’s will for an individual will which is in direct opposition to God’s will.

While it might seem hard to understand to those who seek to do God’s will, we can see many examples. Take the person who, though married, ‘falls in love’ with another person and commits adultery. That is not just a rejection of the spouse, it is a rejection of God, a betrayal of one’s wedding vows, a cooperation with sin on the part of the person who sins with a married person, etc. And that sin doesn’t just ‘stop’ once the sex is done. If unrepented, that sin exists in and through eternity, which is why hell, being eternal, is a just CONSEQUENCE. Not punishment but consequence.

The justice of hell is that it is eternal because the sin is eternal. The mercy is that the person still exists and not only that, exists in the full ‘enjoyment’ of having chosen HIS (or HER) own way. . .forever. The ‘torment’ is a consequence of both the justice and the mercy – justice demands that what was done wrong must be ‘paid for’, mercy keeps the punishment mere ‘physical pain’ and not annihilation.

Far from being Idi Amin or hell being a torture chamber unjustly forced on the merely temporal and ‘repentent’, it is a merciful and just consequence of unrepented mortal sin.

It is emphatically NOT what any Christian would wish to see another person choose. . .but we can’t be ostriches with heads on the sand or run around sticking our fingers in our ears LALALALALALA and pretending it just ‘doesn’t exist’ so that we don’t have to worry our little heads but just enjoy that ‘Grandpa God’ who just sits and wants us to ‘love’ (just an amorphous word which can mean ANYTHING and encompass anything, even two absolutely opposing concepts!) without any ‘worries’ of having done ‘wrong’. . .

This looks like an interesting post and will think on it for this evening…havn’t read the entirety due to dinner…long day , …reporting back tom

 

[Ahimsa]

You MUST either renounce your dis-belief in hell OR leave the Church.

Where is this statement in the catechism?

 

[Shike]

I am in full agreement and comply with the codes of behavour set out by The Catholic Church my entire life.As such , I am a Catholic in good standing and in Comunion with the Pope. If someone wants to be immature and suggest what does RC stand for. and other cruel comments in order to gain popularity by means of creating a common villain, then they are not in Communion with my worthy Catholic Spiritual Effort and therefore not in Communion with the Pope himself.

On my part there is no cruelty. Remember that these are forums and it is very hard to gather the tone of the poster.

And “RC” is confusing. As I said there are people who are Reformed Calvinist (though there doctrine probably doesn’t fit here, looking at things deeper).

No one is questioning or should be questioning your devotion.

ciao,
Michael

 

[Shike]

Where is this statement in the catechism?

That particular statement of renouncing disbelief or leaving the Church is not in the catechism. Although the statement he makes is important with regards to logical conclusion I find it a bit harsh and not very helpful at the moment.

Instead we only need to help FurtherSuntime see that hell is a part of the deposit of faith and can’t be just dropped.

You yourself have helped by correctly reporting what the Church teaches. Thank you.

Also, FurtherSuntime… please address my post #27 when you get the time. I think it will help.

 

[coolduude]

Where is this statement in the catechism?

Admittedly it is not. I apologize for that.

However, one cannot continue to deny the existence of hell and still claim to be in full union with Holy Mother Church. A good remedy would be to denounce your dis-belief in hell and go to Confession with a sincere heart. All will be well then. Until then, one is essentially committing heresy.
CCC 1035:

The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Shike;8142312]That hell doesn’t “inspire your spirit” is not of primary importance here. What is important is to humbly follow the teachings of the Church. If one didn’t want to humbly follow the teachings of the Church, then I don’t know why that person would want to remain Catholic. And besides, if one’s own personal likes and dislikes were the criterion for doctrine, it does very well defeat the purpose of the Church… no?

F. Suntime
I thought the primary importance involved acts of charity which are inspired by Gods Love through felt care and concern for others. .Inspiration is all that can cause true virtue. Not directives suggesting that fear is the motivator.

Going about life giving with one hand in order to satisfy teachings instead of two open hands of genuine care is always obvious. The emphasis in Spirituality is to wake the soul within, not follow along like a robot out of fear. Love of thy neighbor is not possible by following directives. It must be felt

Shike
As it stands, just because the Church doesn’t explicitly say someone will go to hell for not believing in hell… doesn’t mean that person won’t go to hell. I suppose it’s very possible that someone could disbelieve in hell and still go there anyways.

F. Suntime
If you have read my entries you will see that this statement does not apply to my thinking.Ever since a Toddler , raised Catholic, I have never believed such a place existed. The idea of hell is not a reality in my life. My inspiration comes from the goodness , not the ultimatums

Shike
Again, it’s not really something a Catholic can get rid of. And yes, there are very many reasons for accepting hell. There are many instances from scripture. We can talk about those if you want. There are also examples from the nature of free-will using philosophy & theology, which I will get to presently. But the most compelling reason to believe in hell as a Catholic is because Holy Mother Church cares for you and is the Church that Christ founded, the one meant to bring you safely into God’s arms.

F Suntime
The Holy Mother Church cares for me, and I for the Church. There is an understanding and the idea and word hell, are not allowed in my household alongside my statue of Mary, pictures of Jesus and the ambiance of my home. Reason being, hell just doesn’t fit in with the theme.
Would it be possible to walk into a Church on Christmas Day , only to hear a huge Sermon about hell…? of course not. Everyday should have the ambiance of Christmas Day in the good interior life. The idea of a hell just does not fit in.

Shike
God wants to make us saints. A saint is one who is fully alive and loves like God loves. A saint is also someone who loves God. God, because He is love, won’t force someone to love him. God respects our choices, because that is the only loving thing to do (in the end at least). So if someone after repeated invitations to love God, still refuses God and that someone makes up his mind that he never wants God to bother him ever, ever, ever, again and wants to make his decision final… then God just might respect that person’s decision. Eternal separation from God is hell. Whether it is a spatio-temporal reality or not might still be up for speculation. Regardless, it is a “place” (whether spatio-temporal or not) of extreme suffering. So the conclusion from all this is, strangely enough, that the existence of hell is necessitated by God’s love and the nature of free-will.

F Suntime
No mortal could reject a creator of this universe. It is illogical. No one can really even imagine God outside of prayer. One cannot reject what one does not know…this again is logical

Shike
Again, this line of yours is mistaken, it does not follow logically from the belief in hell nor is it a position supported by the Church. Hell exists… but we can never know if someone will go there or not… we are not the judge; God is the judge.

F Suntime
You did not include the whole statement, you left the second sentence out which belongs to the first…here it is again…

Comfortable expectation in another’s misery in an infinite torment would be absolute ill-will …as we know,what we expect by choice, is what we desire.

This comment would seem bullet proof with respects to general physcology

Shike
Your position/questions are important, however, so I am glad you brought them up. Especially since there has been a popular movement in today’s culture to “get rid of hell”.

F Suntime. Todays culture is only what it is and thanks, I enjoy your entries
ciao,
Michael

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Further Suntime: I think I understand what you’re saying, and it is certainly true that the Catholic Church has never authoritatively stated that anybody is in hell (any person that is, not even Judas) though I believe The Church definitely states that Satan is there. So obviously at least one ‘being’ (though pure spirit) does inhabit some ‘place’ whether that is physical or something ‘beyond’ physical which again according to the definition of the Church is the ‘absence of God’ (and that through personal choice).

Where I think you’re veering off is that you are visualizing or conceptualizing Hell as a place of torment (which in fact it is) but that you are focused on the ‘torment’ aspect of it and ignoring the ‘choice’ aspect. I mean, think of a Brazilian wax (ouch). Not what I would personally choose but many women do. . .freely, despite the pain. So there must be something ‘beyond’ the mere physical pain which is ‘worth’ that pain. Just so, there is something beyond the ‘torment’ of hell which is ‘worth it’ to the person who chooses it --and that something is, ironically enough, the kind of rejection of God’s will for an individual will which is in direct opposition to God’s will.

While it might seem hard to understand to those who seek to do God’s will, we can see many examples. Take the person who, though married, ‘falls in love’ with another person and commits adultery. That is not just a rejection of the spouse, it is a rejection of God, a betrayal of one’s wedding vows, a cooperation with sin on the part of the person who sins with a married person, etc. And that sin doesn’t just ‘stop’ once the sex is done. If unrepented, that sin exists in and through eternity, which is why hell, being eternal, is a just CONSEQUENCE. Not punishment but consequence.

The justice of hell is that it is eternal because the sin is eternal. The mercy is that the person still exists and not only that, exists in the full ‘enjoyment’ of having chosen HIS (or HER) own way. . .forever. The ‘torment’ is a consequence of both the justice and the mercy – justice demands that what was done wrong must be ‘paid for’, mercy keeps the punishment mere ‘physical pain’ and not annihilation.

Far from being Idi Amin or hell being a torture chamber unjustly forced on the merely temporal and ‘repentent’, it is a merciful and just consequence of unrepented mortal sin.

It is emphatically NOT what any Christian would wish to see another person choose. . .but we can’t be ostriches with heads on the sand or run around sticking our fingers in our ears LALALALALALA and pretending it just ‘doesn’t exist’ so that we don’t have to worry our little heads but just enjoy that ‘Grandpa God’ who just sits and wants us to ‘love’ (just an amorphous word which can mean ANYTHING and encompass anything, even two absolutely opposing concepts!) without any ‘worries’ of having done ‘wrong’. . .

Thankyou, This is very interesting and certainly well explained. We can cross off the last paragraph as I have filled the gap with my perspective on consequence and justice. The Grampa God you describe is not at all how I perceive God to be. I’m very aware of how individuals can reject God and destroy lives. (unfortuanately)

The idea which is explained above regarding the eternal nature of unrepentant sin is entirely new to myself. I have a few thoughts after thinking on this for a while, although… I take my thinking very seriously.In order to fully comprehend exactly what is being explained un-hurried consideration is at hand. Can you direct me to the source of this analogy so that I can see the full explanation of the interpretation. If there is no concrete source , that is fine , I will return after some thought and ask a few questions in order to reply properly.

 

[ahs]

#1 comments made about the collection plate were following another posters thinking as premise. Therefore your rational is out of context.

#2 it is a well known fact that we as Catholics do not interpet scripture litterally. Therefore all
random admonishments are whimsical Also to be clear and in allowance for constructive progresss

I am in full agreement and comply with the codes of behavour set out by The Catholic Church my entire life.As such , I am a Catholic in good standing and in Comunion with the Pope. If someone wants to be immature and suggest what does RC stand for. and other cruel comments in order to gain popularity by means of creating a common villain, then they are not in Communion with my worthy Catholic Spiritual Effort and therefore not in Communion with the Pope himself.

Please submitt comments in a suitable fashion which adheres to our expected fellowship, which is crucial
to progress

#1 - My rational is within context because you made a blanket statement, not directed to any poster. You said, “If a person…” That implies everyone.

#2 - You said you are Catholic, that have been ever since you were a child. Regardless of what people think they know about what the Church teaches on interpretation of Scripture, the Church DOES interpret that verse (2Pet1:20) to mean exactly what it says. You have no authority to interpret that verse or any other verse; and because you are a Catholic, you are also bound by the Catholic teaching that only the Magisterium has authority to interpret Scripture. Any portion of your claim that hell does not exist that is based on the Bible is no longer credible because you interpreted a source that prohibits you from interpreting it.

You are not in Communion with the Pope if you reject the Church teaching that hell exists. That is not my opinion, it is just the fact. Catholicism does not allow for “pick and choose” regarding Church teaching. You either accept it, or you don’t.