Be Warned & Believe what you Truly Will

  • Thread starter Thread starter FurtherSuntime
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Fatima Story is important to myself. Therefore I must continue with the following and return later in the weekend

Third Apparition:

" Our Lady explained"…" You have seen Hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them God wants to establish throughout the world the devotion to my Immaculate Heart If people do what I will tell you, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end."
  1. We learn above that the souls of poor sinners in Hell, can be saved through devotion to the Immaculate Heart. It is what God wants.
Also from quote " many souls will be saved and there will be peace" All within the same context, in event.

Therefore, one would understand that Hell, is not an eternal location as described by many in this thread. Obviously or at least within reason is the notion that Our Lady was referring to a Hell where poor sinners go by means of sinning in earthly existence…from quote " many souls will be saved and there will be peace"

Forth Apparition

The text explains prior to the following, our Lady was teaching the children to pray rather for the health of souls than of bodies.

“Pray! Pray a great deal and make sacrifice’s for sinners, for many souls go to hell for not having someone to pray and make sacrifices for them.”
  1. In the second entry, entitled Fourth Apparition, The children are asked by Our Lady to pray and make sacrifice’s for many souls who have no one to pray for them and thus go to hell. Here we learn the profound reality in the power of prayer for others . The importance and significance in the unification of man. We effect each others fate in devotion, charity and of course prayer. We are all inter-connected together through Divine Will , towards our sanctification.
The unity of man, certainly seen to be instrumental in the consequence of the souls fate with respects to hell. The message unfolds mutual responsibility to be most sure. Love of thy neighbor in full blossom, graciously asked by The Mother of God.

The exact term seen in the third apparition"many souls" is repeated by Our Lady in the fourth apparition above. I believe it is reasonable under this circumstance of exact term, "many souls"to introduce the same evidence in the absence of eternal damnation. In fact , we learn that God wants to save the souls in hell.

I do not believe much of what is seen and stated in this thread, is in keeping with above understandings . It would appear to be a very serious matter. Thankyou
 
FurtherSuntime, you are limiting your perception of what hell could be or not be by your own earthly experience or education. Hell cannot be limited by only what you know or understand, because you only know and understand the earthly world, the physical and time-based limited existence on Earth. When we die, we will no longer be limited to that physical, worldly existence. We will be in an eternal spiritual existence, and we can only look to the Teachings of the Church to even vaguely understand what that will entail.

If you really beleive your views are accurate, you need to be presenting them to the Church Magesterium before posting them on a public forum so the Mother Church can make a formal decision…before you wind up inducing scandal and heresey.

If you were anything other than a Catholic, I’d entertain more dicussion on this. But you have proclaimed communion with the Pope and the Catholic Church and continued in your obstinate, incredulaous, fight to disprove the Church teaching on Hell. That is border-line hersey, at the very least (see post #44 for explanation).

If you truely want to be in communion with the Church, then study the Church teachings that are already in place regarding Hell and stop trying to re-invent the wheel (as another poster already suggested).

With the greatest amount of love I can have for a fellow Christian, I must tell you this, because I fear for your soul. A woman once stood up in the middle of a talk given by Bishop Fulton Sheen. She yelled out that she did not beleive in Hell. His reply to her, “…you will when you get there.”

God Bless you in your journey for Truth,
ahs
 
FurtherSuntime said:
The Fatima Story is important to myself. Therefore I must continue with the following and return later in the weekend

Third Apparition:

" Our Lady explained"…" You have seen Hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them God wants to establish throughout the world the devotion to my Immaculate Heart If people do what I will tell you, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end."
  1. We learn above that the souls of poor sinners in Hell, can be saved through devotion to the Immaculate Heart. It is what God wants.
Click to expand...
It is through devotion to the Immaculate Heart and our prayers that the souls of poor sinners will be saved from the fire of Hell. Once a soul is in Hell, it is for eternity, just as a soul who attains Heaven is there for eternity. We make our choices on earth which determine the fate of our existence. Only souls in Purgatory can be relieved through prayer, fasting, and sacrifice until their souls are purified to enter Heaven and partake in the Beatific Vision. These souls in Purgatory cannot effectually pray for themselves.

Let us pray (Oremus for the souls in Purgatory as well as our fellow travelers on this earth.

Blessings,
4H
 
FurtherSuntime,

Please use complete sentences.

And if you want to ignore my arguments, then fine, but please don’t think you’ve answered my arguments by restating what you have already said.

You are confused about consciousness, self-awareness, and pain.
 
Count me in as one who was warned. Thank you for the warning. Now I can go back to worrying about something else. Like how many people here are worried you lost your rocker. It’s not an orthodox understanding, but I don’t understand why there are so many people who are concerned about you holding this view. 🤷
 
Good Day,

Ive decided to reply to each of the entries which appear after the enlightening in post #61.

Of course I’m referring to the exact words of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the well known story of Fatima. Also, ddarko has made a post and I have more time today, so I will begin with honoring his questions with a proper reply.

…(The miraculous and beautiful story of Fatima will not be subject to shameful and reckless
deconstruction. The message from heaven is clear. They are words spoken to and obviously understood, by children)

Outright talk impiously challenging the clarity and simplicity in the Fatima Story will be ignored)
 
ddarko said:
See the bolded sections above, Mivart had similar views to what is stated there and his teachings were condemned by the Congregation of the Index and the Holy Office on 14 and 19 July, 1893 (cf. “Civiltà Cattolica”, I, 1893, 672)

So your idea of things getting easier in hell, gnashing of teeth is not sustained etc are condemned by the Catholic Church.

And your phrase

“…sustain the hatred, sustain the gnashing of the teeth into and within Gods realm of existence.”

is even more confusing.

In short, why this sudden kick to spread condemned teaching? Why not HUMBLE yourself and accept the Church teachings and those of SAINTS whose knowledge had come before you?

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
I may have come to understand in part, why there are confusions in our communicating styles.

To explain:… My Field , training and expertise is in the area of classical music. Often I find myself using words which normally would be handy to music including the meaning, in context relative to music. It may well be that your area of expertise, experience ect is in a Field which makes use of a different group of often accessed wording. I find your commentary refreshing because I believe you are earnestly trying to figure out what the heck I’m talking about. 👍

Firstly, by acknowledging that above is confusing, you are showing that you do not follow or
understand what was being said. Therefore the claim you make that Mivart had similar views
would not accordingly fit. He may have had similar thinking, I don’t know but I wonder
if that was before or after the Fatima Enlightenment. Regardless, the Holy Mother Church in its
prudent and patient process does not make extraordinary change without great amounts of time. We all know that.

Also, the wonderful message of Unity in Fatima, is without question in full swing in recent Papal initiative. Obviously the development would be very pleasing to God. Growth and development
is what everything in Spirituality is all about. Not just individually, but family, community, country
and not without reason , understandings which augment and compel a whole and true lively faith. In short, whole unity. I will coin a new phrase today,

Global Sanctification ( regardless of faith . We are very well aware of the God loving respect Rome has for culture)

With respects to your complaint as follows:

“And your phrase ,sustain the hatred, sustain the gnashing of the teeth into and within Gods realm of existence.” , is even more confusing. "

.For both our convenience, Sustain (Websters) Uphold or allow validity, rightfulness, truth.

In the chosen belief of hell, God upholds and allows consequence to sinfulness by directly negotiating active and eternal participation God in the manifestation of hell would be continuing truth (sustaining) the reality of sin itself onto and within his eternal dimension. A clear opposing interference of obstructive nature, in the eternal perfection, within Gods realm of existence.

In short, eternal torturous damnation(hell) is an insult to the reality, of the Eternal .The Eternal is without question a Sacred Value.

A Sacred Value representing the Home of God.

A Home which all man earnestly strives for whether he knows it or not… We are all graciously trapped in reason. Reason for…Reason. 👍

Your next comment:

"In short, why this sudden kick to spread condemned teaching? Why not HUMBLE yourself and accept the Church teachings and those of SAINTS whose knowledge had come before you?

The only way I could possibly get through this thread is to humble myself. The subject we are discussing is really of no interest to myself. Ever since a toddler in a Catholic Family upbringing , Schools ( all Catholic) I have never really believed a real hell existed. It wrecks
everything else about Jesus , The Trinity and so forth.

All the belief in hell would rationally do, is tap onto your un-conscious mind and begin a process of wondering who you know will wind up a toasted turkey. This is logical and a “greater rejection” of the Church’s teaching.(no doubt)

The tone and ambiance of the forum was nagging at me and I couldn’t figure out what it was. I came to the conclusion that we may have a God which is becoming over complicated. Thus my theme God is available Love and Acceptance period. It should feel good because all God would be is good:thumbsup:

Once I address the fellow members recent postings, a comment will be made. It will directly re-call attention to the thread title theme which we are discussing…“Be Warned & Believe what you Truly Will.” It will be most interesting .

.
 
FurtherSuntime said:
With respects to your complaint as follows:

“And your phrase ,sustain the hatred, sustain the gnashing of the teeth into and within Gods realm of existence.” , is even more confusing. "

.For both our convenience, Sustain (Websters) **Uphold **or allow validity, rightfulness, truth.

In the chosen belief of hell, God upholds and allows consequence to sinfulness by directly negotiating active and eternal participation God in the manifestation of hell would be continuing truth (sustaining) the reality of sin itself onto and within his eternal dimension. A clear opposing interference of obstructive nature, in the eternal perfection, within Gods realm of existence.

In short, eternal torturous damnation(hell) is an insult to the reality, of the Eternal .The Eternal is without question a Sacred Value.
**
**

Your denial of an eternal, torturous damnation is HERESY.

What part of this don’t you get? Even if you had NO ounce of understanding how hell might exist, you cannot go around saying HELL doesn’t exists and say you are Roman Catholic.

Why?

Because you are DENYING a core teaching of the faith.
Click to expand...
FurtherSuntime said:
The only way I could possibly get through this thread is to humble myself. The subject we are discussing is really of no interest to myself. Ever since a toddler in a Catholic Family upbringing , Schools ( all Catholic) I have never really believed a real hell existed. It wrecks
everything else about Jesus , The Trinity and so forth.
Click to expand...
So since you were a toddler, you’ve been down the wrong road. Time to get back on the right path with a little humility.
FurtherSuntime said:
All the belief in hell would rationally do, is tap onto your un-conscious mind and begin a process of wondering who you know will wind up a toasted turkey. **This is logical and a “greater rejection” of the Church’s teaching.(no doubt) **
Click to expand...
You have REJECTED Church teaching.

Believing there is a hell violates NO teaching and neither does it violate the LOVE of God.

Your accusation that it does is OLD. It’s been answered by the Church. READ what is available FIRST. You talk about contradictions which have been resolved.

Take a look at this

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/hellb1.htm

Where you’ve gone off the rails is that you think

“God is Love, he cannot condemn someone to hell.”

What you are forgetting is that the people who end up in hell, CHOSE hell as a result of their actions.

When someone decides to have random sex, it is their free will. When they get AIDS or some STD as a result, you don’t say he cannot get something like that because he never directly chose AIDS. Actions have consequences. HELL is the result of choosing SIN.

Your ignorance of existing literature on religious subjects is so great that now you’ve ended up to re-inventing heretical ideas.

God Bless 🙂
 
Quote ahs:

FurtherSuntime, you are limiting your perception of what hell could be or not be by your own earthly experience or education. Hell cannot be limited by only what you know or understand, because you only know and understand the earthly world, the physical and time-based limited existence on Earth. When we die, we will no longer be limited to that physical, worldly existence. We will be in an eternal spiritual existence, and we can only look to the Teachings of the Church to even vaguely understand what that will entail.

F Suntime:

It would be very apparent that the given idea of eternal torment in consequence for sinners is entirely saturated in the material earthly act of revenge. We learn in the words of Jesus to turn the other cheek. We obviously need this inspiration as we are imperfect

Unquestionably the cheeks represent the Soul or Eternal Spirit of man , and the material survival nature, expressing fear in material virility.

God is perfect and does not require turning the other cheek. Both cheeks represent and unfold, available & perfect Love.

To suggest that our limited idea of consequence (hell) cannot eliminate the the material cheek of revenge on behalf of God, would undoubtedly re-design the God we know.

The absence of all material gain and revenge in the life of Jesus in many ways defines Christianity, and in this we believe defines God.

Therefore, I really can’t see any concrete way to suggest that earthly knowledge is defenseless in the most fundamental understanding of God himself.

God is love and that simply does not fit in with revenge. Hideous consequence is NOT justification. It is insanity in response, to insanity. This is not the God I know .Period.:

ahs:

If you really believe your views are accurate, you need to be presenting them to the Church Magesterium before posting them on a public forum so the Mother Church can make a formal decision…before you wind up inducing scandal and heresey.

If you were anything other than a Catholic, I’d entertain more discussion on this. But you have proclaimed communion with the Pope and the Catholic Church and continued in your obstinate, incredulaous, fight to disprove the Church teaching on Hell. That is border-line hersey, at the very least (see post #44 for explanation).

If you truely want to be in communion with the Church, then study the Church teachings that are already in place regarding Hell and stop trying to re-invent the wheel (as another poster already suggested).

F Suntime:
This is the philosophy section of the forum. The idea is to expand the Philosophy of Theology.

I am expanding in a specific area of Theology. “All Catholic teachings” are about the Philosophy of Theology

As well, thought is how faith, teachings & understandings flourish. Perspective has value. Perspective is how man and thus Catholicism has come to be the genuine faith that we know:thumbsup:.

ahs

With the greatest amount of love I can have for a fellow Christian, I must tell you this, because I fear for your soul. A woman once stood up in the middle of a talk given by Bishop Fulton Sheen. She yelled out that she did not believe in Hell. His reply to her, “…you will when you get there.”

F.Suntime:

Bishop Fulton Sheen was a magnetic, wonderful Bishop. He had a style which forced you on the edge of your seat…( Ive seen re-runs) He could make people think, laugh, cry, and drew out the lively Spirit. To suggest that this Holy Man would candidly remark certain damnation to a living Human being is certain to be without any prudent thought what so ever. I can discuss the dynamics most likely involved in the comment but is it really needed ? I wonder.

God Bless you in your journey for Truth,
ahs
 
Shike said:
FurtherSuntime,

Please use complete sentences.

And if you want to ignore my arguments, then fine, but please don’t think you’ve answered my arguments by restating what you have already said.

You are confused about consciousness, self-awareness, and pain.
Click to expand...
I have responsibilities, thankyou for your patience.

Here is your question: " Why must you think that pain stops consciousness? Consciousness is presupposed for pain to exist."

Torment as we have discovered is severe bodily pain (Websters)

Eternal torment or a being in constant unending severe bodily pain, would be an overwhelming experience. When we are over-whelmed with severe bodily pain, there is no relative comprehension of anything, but the pain.

The overwhelming is not only what pain is, but what pain is for…

Pain is a call to attend the deviation in order to begin the psychological and chemical healing process. The entire body and mind in severe bodily pain transforms into a healing machine. The brain, glands, organs tissue, are all focused on one thing alone, recovery.

True mental self awareness is dis-mantled.( consciousness)

Websters: Consciousness:
State of being conscious, totality of a persons thoughts or feelings, or of a class of these…
 
StrawberryJam said:
Count me in as one who was warned. Thank you for the warning. Now I can go back to worrying about something else. Like how many people here are worried you lost your rocker. It’s not an orthodox understanding, but I don’t understand why there are so many people who are concerned about you holding this view. 🤷
Click to expand...
Interesting & thankyou.
 
ddarko said:
Your denial of an eternal, torturous damnation is HERESY.

What part of this don’t you get? Even if you had NO ounce of understanding how hell might exist, you cannot go around saying HELL doesn’t exists and say you are Roman Catholic.

Why?

Because you are DENYING a core teaching of the faith.
Click to expand...
So since you were a toddler, you’ve been down the wrong road. Time to get back on the right path with a little humility.

You have REJECTED Church teaching.

Believing there is a hell violates NO teaching and neither does it violate the LOVE of God.

Your accusation that it does is OLD. It’s been answered by the Church. READ what is available FIRST. You talk about contradictions which have been resolved.

Take a look at this

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/hellb1.htm

Where you’ve gone off the rails is that you think

“God is Love, he cannot condemn someone to hell.”

What you are forgetting is that the people who end up in hell, CHOSE hell as a result of their actions.

When someone decides to have random sex, it is their free will. When they get AIDS or some STD as a result, you don’t say he cannot get something like that because he never directly chose AIDS. Actions have consequences. HELL is the result of choosing SIN.

Your ignorance of existing literature on religious subjects is so great that now you’ve ended up to re-inventing heretical ideas.

God Bless 🙂

An entry will be posted Monday. In this entry the views expressed above will be
discussed in a very easy to follow manner…

The beautiful day is coming to an end and I have an exciting responsibility ahead. Enjoy the evening and will do my best with time available to enter Mondays thought.

Peace to all , & enjoy the balance of the weekend:to be sure.👍
 
FurtherSuntime said:
God is love and that simply does not fit in with revenge. Hideous consequence is NOT justification. It is insanity in response, to insanity. This is not the God I know .Period.:
Click to expand...
God is Love, and Love is Just. God is a “just” God and a “loving” God. Hell shows us His Divine Justice as well as His Love. He loves us enough, and is “just” enough, that if we choose the life that leads to Hell, He will allow us to enter into that domain that He created for the devil and the fallen angels.

Hell is not God’s insane revenge on sinners. Hell is the consequential choice of sinners, and God will not force anyone to avoid it.

I recently listened to a CD set (3 CD’s, about 3 hrs total) on the nature of hell and how to avoid it. It’s called “Hellbound”; I recommend it as an introduction to the subject of Hell. There are also many talks on “The Four Last Things” that delve into God’s nature and what Hell is, why people go there, and how to avoid it.
 
ahs said:
God is Love, and Love is Just. God is a “just” God and a “loving” God. Hell shows us His Divine Justice as well as His Love. He loves us enough, and is “just” enough, that if we choose the life that leads to Hell, He will allow us to enter into that domain that He created for the devil and the fallen angels.

Hell is not God’s insane revenge on sinners. Hell is the consequential choice of sinners, and God will not force anyone to avoid it.

I recently listened to a CD set (3 CD’s, about 3 hrs total) on the nature of hell and how to avoid it. It’s called “Hellbound”; I recommend it as an introduction to the subject of Hell. There are also many talks on “The Four Last Things” that delve into God’s nature and what Hell is, why people go there, and how to avoid it.
Click to expand...
If its ethically believed that insanity is a just consequence for insanity in humanitys justice system, then one may have their eternal torture chamber. If not, there is no ethic. Ethic demands a constant . One must choose, otherwise ones approach towards justice is without ethic .

Attempts to re-program due to disturbance will not work with truth. .
 
Could I ask a question, Further Suntime?

Assuming a person sins mortally (for which three things are required; 1. Grave matter. 2. Full knowledge. 3. Full consent of the will) and that person dies unrepentent,

please tell me what God’s just actions would be with regard to this person for eternity.

Remember, eternity is not ‘uncounted years’ but an endless ‘now’.

Remember too that the sin (mortal, grave, fully understood and fully consented to) continues for that eternity. IOW, the person never stops sinning and never repents.

Please tell me what God ‘should’ do with the person who never accepts Him, always rejects Him, has ‘injured’ God not just with words but ACTIONS and continues to do so.

Should God forcefully ‘wipe out’ or ‘reprogram’ the person so the person in effect repents and stops sinning? At what point in eternity should that be done? How does that action then represent ‘fairness’ to those in heaven who did NOT sin mortally and had to strive for heaven. .whereas this other person who rejected heaven is (against his will) ‘made’ to be ‘acceptable’ without any effort of his own and, I repeat, against his expressed will?

So what SHOULD God do?

Is the mere ‘absence’ of God ‘enough’? Does it adequately and fully make restitution for grave evils done to God and man not just here on earth but throughout eternity?

Should there be only ‘little’ punishments? IOW, if a person just has ‘one’ unrepented mortal sin, does he have to watch Barney videos daily while a person with ‘two’ unrepented mortal sins has to watch Barney AND wear a costume, and a person with ‘three’ has to watch Barney, wear a costume, and have to practice playing the guitar 2 hours daily, ONLY the “Barney” theme. . .etc.

While the effect I made might seem a little ‘frivolous’ it isn’t meant to be, it’s more a counterbalance to the extensive focus on ‘torture’ as if torture is ONLY evil and is forced onto unwilling people. There are many activities which cause pain (torture) and which are not intrinsically evil (shaving) and for which the result (smooth skin) is considered worth the pain. It is chosen.

People in hell choose the torture. They really do. They would RATHER go through pain, even intense pain, because the result --having THEIR OWN WAY instead of having to ‘submit to God’ and be sorry for sin-- is ‘worth it.’

Now, a person getting a Brazilian wax may yell during the procedure. But she isn’t yelling ‘stop’, she’s reacting to the physical pain. But at the end she says, "Good job’ and she comes back again in a month or two.

The person in hell may yell during the pain, but it’s a reaction to the pain (which at least until the second coming is not physical but ‘spiritual’) and not a ‘stop, I’m sorry, I’ll be good’ or even a "stop, I don’t deserve this!’ (because the person knows that he does deserve the pain. He knows he did wrong, is still doing wrong, and always intends to do wrong. . .but he also knows that justice demands that wrong be punished. . .not ‘ignored’, not celebrated. . .but punished. . .simply as a normal RESULT. Just as an object in motion tends to remain in motion, an evil action or thought deserves to be punished because of its nature.
 
As we know there are a number of items in the question which will require a well organized
reply. I will begin what would be my opinion without delay. It will take time and feel a day or two should be adequate. If I’m not comfortable with the development and require a day or two extension, I will advise. There may as well be a question that comes to mind , although I feel
after reading through 5-6 times, a rational approach which has integrity is possible.
 
FurtherSuntime said:
Here is your question: " Why must you think that pain stops consciousness? Consciousness is presupposed for pain to exist."

Torment as we have discovered is severe bodily pain (Websters)

Eternal torment or a being in constant unending severe bodily pain, would be an overwhelming experience. When we are over-whelmed with severe bodily pain, there is no relative comprehension of anything, but the pain.

The overwhelming is not only what pain is, but what pain is for…

Pain is a call to attend the deviation in order to begin the psychological and chemical healing process. The entire body and mind in severe bodily pain transforms into a healing machine. The brain, glands, organs tissue, are all focused on one thing alone, recovery.

True mental self awareness is dis-mantled.( consciousness)

Websters: Consciousness:
State of being conscious, totality of a persons thoughts or feelings, or of a class of these…
Click to expand...
Thank you for addressing this question. Most of all I hoped that you would re-address post #27 in light of my response to your objection that we know nothing about God (middle of post #42). But I will take what I can get.

Webster’s dictionary will only get you so far. It is a good place to start, but in general it is not sufficient. Furthermore, please realize that Webster’s definition, the definition that you quoted, actually contradicts your position.

You equate self-awareness with consciousness. According to you, if self-awareness is taken away, then consciousness is taken away also. But this is not the case in reality, and here’s why: You said yourself that someone undergoing extreme agony loses their self-awareness (though I think this claim is also wrong, I will concede it for now to prove a point). However, the person undergoing extreme agony would still be undergoing thoughts about how painful the event is. Because the person is still undergoing thoughts, feelings, experiences, ect., the person in question is still conscious and thus possesses consciousness.

Therefore your list of hell-features is problematic at best.

Ciao,
Michael
 
Shike said:
Thank you for addressing this question. Most of all I hoped that you would re-address post #27 in light of my response to your objection that we know nothing about God (middle of post #42). But I will take what I can get.

Webster’s dictionary will only get you so far. It is a good place to start, but in general it is not sufficient. Furthermore, please realize that Webster’s definition, the definition that you quoted, actually contradicts your position.

You equate self-awareness with consciousness. According to you, if self-awareness is taken away, then consciousness is taken away also. But this is not the case in reality, and here’s why: You said yourself that someone undergoing extreme agony loses their self-awareness (though I think this claim is also wrong, I will concede it for now to prove a point). However, the person undergoing extreme agony would still be undergoing thoughts about how painful the event is. Because the person is still undergoing thoughts, feelings, experiences, ect., the person in question is still conscious and thus possesses consciousness.

Therefore your list of hell-features is problematic at best.

Ciao,
Michael
Click to expand...
Noticed your post while going over T.Ergo’s post… I will reply re above tonight…Are you sure …#27 & # 42 ? I will assume this is correct. Once complete I will need some free space for T Ergo questions and return in a day or two.
 
Shike said:
Thank you for addressing this question. Most of all I hoped that you would re-address post #27 in light of my response to your objection that we know nothing about God (middle of post #42). But I will take what I can get.

Webster’s dictionary will only get you so far. It is a good place to start, but in general it is not sufficient. Furthermore, please realize that Webster’s definition, the definition that you quoted, actually contradicts your position.

You equate self-awareness with consciousness. According to you, if self-awareness is taken away, then consciousness is taken away also. But this is not the case in reality, and here’s why: You said yourself that someone undergoing extreme agony loses their self-awareness (though I think this claim is also wrong, I will concede it for now to prove a point). However, the person undergoing extreme agony would still be undergoing thoughts about how painful the event is. Because the person is still undergoing thoughts, feelings, experiences, ect., the person in question is still conscious and thus possesses consciousness.

Therefore your list of hell-features is problematic at best.

Ciao,
Michael
Click to expand...
F Suntime re #42

In the reply I was referring to the unrepentant sinner and adding that no one can really imagine God outside of prayer. I was speaking in very general terms. The intended emphasis was the focus of disposition, in the unrepentant sinner. ( I don’t disagree with your thoughts here)

I was attempting to show that even the faithful can have difficulty getting a perfect grasp on the whole being that God would be, in “contrast”… to the unrepentant sinner who would not know God at all.

I would think in other words that the subject would know very little of the available peace,love, ect of God . The Un-rep sinner would of had very little use for the idea of God, and would not know him at all…until the final end.

The final end in life unfolding the reality of creation for basically the first time

In opinion the invitations on behalf of God which you mention wouldn’t be items which simply pop up or suddenly come about. An un-rep sinner of the class I think we are speaking of would be a groomed expert in the anti-inspiration dept. Becoming an expert in anything takes time and practice. So in this light it seemed difficult to expand on the thinking and was left un-addressed.

With respects to thoughts re. torment & consciousness

The idea I think is credible in a definite loss to value in self available awareness. There wouldn’t seem to be any true value or likeness which would represent the true self which self, understood self to be.

I’ll be back God willing in a couple of days. I’m almost sure you will have a thought or two and will look forward to seeing the feedback
 
[Edited to remove my post so as not to draw focus off Tantum ergo’s.]

I’ll say “ditto” regarding Tantum ergo’s post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top