can non christians go to heaven

[Sufjon]

That point is irrelevant as it relies on your own subjective observations. Heaven is a temporary place before the resurrection of the physical body on earth.

Forever, right? I’m not trying to be argumentative, but would you be agreeable to explaining the particulars of the process by which your physical body will be walking around on the earth 12 billion years from now?

The answer is obviously that ALL non-Roman-Catholics ( and Roman-Catholics who have not confessed before death) do not go to Heaven, that is do not partake in the bodily resurrection and eternal life on the new earth.

I have every reason to believe that you are absolutely right on that point, however, I would be inclined to extend that assessment to a broader representation of the human race, to include Catholics who confessed before the prescribed deathbed deadline, which is of course an entirely man-made presumption, based on what could be, but probably is not a proper estimation of the meaning of the words of Christ.

Maybe someone authoritative could respond?

Those who need the security of authority do seem to assemble and congregate in the same places. Jesus and John the Baptist didn’t roost with them, so we should be mindful as to whose direction we seek.
.

The rest is all speculation and wishful thinking?

Yes, my body walking around on the earth, a new earth or whatever 30 trillion years from now is indeed wishful thinking. I had not heard Jesus describe any such arrangement to the level of detail that has been made of it all.

Or am I mistaken? Perhaps misinterpretation of God’s Mercy?

Probably. The question works both ways. My suggestion would be to give God a little more credit maybe.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Tenofovir]

Forever, right? I’m not trying to be argumentative, but would you be agreeable to explaining the particulars of the process by which your physical body will be walking around on the earth 12 billion years from now?

For that I have to draw on what NT Wright says who is an Anglican Bishop. Whose books and lectures have strenthened many a Catholics faith and brought them closer to God. Robert Barron quotes Bishop Wright in the 1st episode of the Catholicism DVD too. But this is also Catholic teaching too. Think of Jesus’ Resurrected Body. He could walk through walls, He could eat and drink, He had physical presence yet He looked different to His earlier physical body, and at the same time He was recognisable. He still has the SAME PHYSICAL body. These bodies do not break down the way our own physical bodies do, yet they are physical. Jesus was not a re-animated corpse but had a new body. A body which does not undergo degradation or corruption.

It should be noted that time is measured in changes in physical objects (breakdown of atoms for example) but after Christ returns time will no longer pass as the laws of physics will change. So 12 billion years is not really 12 billion years. It’s different to our current experience.

I have every reason to believe that you are absolutely right on that point, however, I would be inclined to extend that assessment to a broader representation of the human race, to include Catholics who confessed before the prescribed deathbed deadline, which is of course an entirely man-made presumption, based on what could be, but probably is not a proper estimation of the meaning of the words of Christ.

My assessment is the most conservative one. It’s better to err on the side of caution.

Those who need the security of authority do seem to assemble and congregate in the same places. Jesus and John the Baptist didn’t roost with them, so we should be mindful as to whose direction we seek.

But Jesus authorised a Church on earth to spread His message and maintain it. The point you raise is fair but is in danger of being a Sola Scriptura interpretation.
.

Yes, my body walking around on the earth, a new earth or whatever 30 trillion years from now is indeed wishful thinking. I had not heard Jesus describe any such arrangement to the level of detail that has been made of it all.

It’s an extrapolation from Christs’ own body after the Resurrection. It’s also based on what was understood by Jews and Early Christians when one meant Resurrection. It meant Resurrection in bodily form, and it turned out to be the type of body Jesus had - we have clues to its properties from the Gospels.

Have a listen here (it’s a legal link, don’t worry):
roanoke.edu/media/crs/NTWright07.mp3

Probably. The question works both ways. My suggestion would be to give God a little more credit maybe.

God Bless You.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Tenofovir]

Here’s another good link to watch/listen to:
NT Wright on the Resurrection:
veritas.org/Media.aspx#!/v/24

 

[Sufjon]

For that I have to draw on what NT Wright says who is an Anglican Bishop. Whose books and lectures have strenthened many a Catholics faith and brought them closer to God. Robert Barron quotes Bishop Wright in the 1st episode of the Catholicism DVD too. But this is also Catholic teaching too. Think of Jesus’ Resurrected Body. He could walk through walls, He could eat and drink, He had physical presence yet He looked different to His earlier physical body, and at the same time He was recognisable. He still has the SAME PHYSICAL body. These bodies do not break down the way our own physical bodies do, yet they are physical. Jesus was not a re-animated corpse but had a new body. A body which does not undergo degradation or corruption.

It should be noted that time is measured in changes in physical objects (breakdown of atoms for example) but after Christ returns time will no longer pass as the laws of physics will change. So 12 billion years is not really 12 billion years. It’s different to our current experience.

My assessment is the most conservative one. It’s better to err on the side of caution.

But Jesus authorised a Church on earth to spread His message and maintain it. The point you raise is fair but is in danger of being a Sola Scriptura interpretation.
.

It’s an extrapolation from Christs’ own body after the Resurrection. It’s also based on what was understood by Jews and Early Christians when one meant Resurrection. It meant Resurrection in bodily form, and it turned out to be the type of body Jesus had - we have clues to its properties from the Gospels.

Have a listen here (it’s a legal link, don’t worry):
roanoke.edu/media/crs/NTWright07.mp3

God Bless You.

Hi Tenofovir: My perception is that our discussion highlights the profound differences that arise when different groups of people read the same words, and moreover, how even within the same groups there can be differing opinions. Of course, in this case, we are on polar opposite ends of the spiritual spectrum. As it pertains to the discussion regarding who gets into heaven and who does not, I would have to say that the ability for you and I to have different interpretations is likely inbuilt, or at least allowable in our design, with the Designer being the source of both potentials. Further to the point, your ability to reason and mine have produced different outcomes, however, both your cognitive abilities, proclivities and life experiences are to a large extent outside of your control, and of course the same applies to me. The conditions and factors that have shaped our views, especially our ability to learn, reason and form conclusions were conferred on us by the very God that your reasoning presumes will judge us for the outcomes regarding what we end up believing, which are in large part governed by the conditions I have just mentioned, which are in turn well out of your control and my control, and very much determined by God. Therefore, to cast you or I into Hell for arriving at the wrong understanding would be as foolish as the two of us designing a boat with a hole in the hull and then cursing it for sinking.

I look at the context of what Christ said against the backdrop of the larger human spiritual experience, and mysticism in particular. When I read the words of Jesus, it is apparent to me, as it would be to any Hindu, that Jesus was familiar with these. The problem, in my opinion, is that those who came after and affixed their own meaning to His words were not familiar with these, but they had exceptional organizational skills, with many of them even having agendas other than the spiritual. These came to be the mainstream following of what we now label as Christianity, but Christ does not exist only within the dominion of one religion or another, rather, He is ubiquitously present throughout all of creation and accessible through the earnest effort of the heart, and not the mind. My conclusion is that neither you or I are going to a place called Hell.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Tenofovir]

Hi Tenofovir: My perception is that our discussion highlights the profound differences that arise when different groups of people read the same words, and moreover, how even within the same groups there can be differing opinions.

That can be one explanation but does not have to be the only one. The other explanation could be that the Bible has to be read in a particular way, based on the 1st Century Jewish tradition and culture, language used in the texts and oral Church tradition which was not recorded in the NT per se. Hence there is a Magisterium of the Catholic Church which assembled the Bible and read it in context of what Jesus and His disciples said and meant.

Of course, in this case, we are on polar opposite ends of the spiritual spectrum. As it pertains to the discussion regarding who gets into heaven and who does not, I would have to say that the ability for you and I to have different interpretations is likely inbuilt, or at least allowable in our design, with the Designer being the source of both potentials. Further to the point, your ability to reason and mine have produced different outcomes, however, both your cognitive abilities, proclivities and life experiences are to a large extent outside of your control, and of course the same applies to me. The conditions and factors that have shaped our views, especially our ability to learn, reason and form conclusions were conferred on us by the very God that your reasoning presumes will judge us for the outcomes regarding what we end up believing, which are in large part governed by the conditions I have just mentioned, which are in turn well out of your control and my control, and very much determined by God. Therefore, to cast you or I into Hell for arriving at the wrong understanding would be as foolish as the two of us designing a boat with a hole in the hull and then cursing it for sinking.

I don’t think God casts anyone into hell. The choice comes from rejecting God and rejecting following God in one’s life. Now I know this gives the impression that the Church decides who goes to hell or not, but it’s not the case. Still, what I’ve missed, is the 1st page of this thread and that is the text of the Catechism which states that people who through no fault of their own are not able to learn and accept Christ may still be united with Him after death. As I am Catholic, I subordinate myself to that teaching. I however cannot say with certainty that everyone will go to Heaven (be resurrected) as that would be both dangerous for those who listen to it and dangerous for me for preaching possible heresy. Still I think God is Perfect, Merciful and Just. It’s just that from our point of view Merciful may imply forgiving all sins and just letting people in, but the truth may not be such, for mercy may imply that those who genuinely accept Christ achieve His mercy. We have to assume that we know God’s Will right down to the last detail, but God’s Love is also manifested as giving us free will and the very real possibility or rejecting Him outright. Are there extenuating circumstances in rejecting God? Say rejecting God because one dislikes incense or really bought the history of the Crusades or associates Catholics with conservatism and politics (and one rejects those), one one just hates Western culture because of imperialism? Am I culpable if through my behaviour a person gets the wrong view of Christianity and decides he’d rather not have anything to do with it? People do generalise and rationalise this way. I think I may well be culpable to some degree, and if I purposefully drive people away I am definitely rejecting God, though I may be a regular church and confession goer.

My conclusion is that neither you or I are going to a place called Hell.

I certainly pray so. God Bless you. But you’re on the way to accepting Christ it seems (or have done so), I hope you persevere and do so. And of course I would not want anyone to go hell, by anyone I really mean anyone (past and present, not even guys like Hitler.)

 

[Sufjon]

That can be one explanation but does not have to be the only one. The other explanation could be that the Bible has to be read in a particular way, based on the 1st Century Jewish tradition and culture, language used in the texts and oral Church tradition which was not recorded in the NT per se. Hence there is a Magisterium of the Catholic Church which assembled the Bible and read it in context of what Jesus and His disciples said and meant.

I don’t think God casts anyone into hell. The choice comes from rejecting God and rejecting following God in one’s life. Now I know this gives the impression that the Church decides who goes to hell or not, but it’s not the case. Still, what I’ve missed, is the 1st page of this thread and that is the text of the Catechism which states that people who through no fault of their own are not able to learn and accept Christ may still be united with Him after death. As I am Catholic, I subordinate myself to that teaching. I however cannot say with certainty that everyone will go to Heaven (be resurrected) as that would be both dangerous for those who listen to it and dangerous for me for preaching possible heresy. Still I think God is Perfect, Merciful and Just. It’s just that from our point of view Merciful may imply forgiving all sins and just letting people in, but the truth may not be such, for mercy may imply that those who genuinely accept Christ achieve His mercy. We have to assume that we know God’s Will right down to the last detail, but God’s Love is also manifested as giving us free will and the very real possibility or rejecting Him outright. Are there extenuating circumstances in rejecting God? Say rejecting God because one dislikes incense or really bought the history of the Crusades or associates Catholics with conservatism and politics (and one rejects those), one one just hates Western culture because of imperialism? Am I culpable if through my behaviour a person gets the wrong view of Christianity and decides he’d rather not have anything to do with it? People do generalise and rationalise this way. I think I may well be culpable to some degree, and if I purposefully drive people away I am definitely rejecting God, though I may be a regular church and confession goer.

I certainly pray so. God Bless you. But you’re on the way to accepting Christ it seems (or have done so), I hope you persevere and do so. And of course I would not want anyone to go hell, by anyone I really mean anyone (past and present, not even guys like Hitler.)

Hi Tenofovir: While the particulars of what we believe are different, I can tell by what you write that you are a person who has their heart in the right place. Such people are the same without regard to what religious tradition they come from. Whatever it is they believe, they got it right simply through goodness and kindness.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[steve_b]

Only Catholics who have repented all their sins at confession go to heaven. Yes? No-one else.

I think it is true that all in heaven will be faithful Catholics.
T:

That point is irrelevant as it relies on your own subjective observations. Heaven is a temporary place before the resurrection of the physical body on earth.

This is my understanding.

At death of the body, the soul and body seperate. The soul is judged and is immediately going to hell, purgatory, or heaven. The only temporary place is purgatory.

At the resurrection, (end of the world, 2nd coming, ) body and soul reunite. If the soul has been in hell then the soul is reunited with the resurrected body in hell. If the soul has been in heaven, then the soul is reunited with the resurrected body in heaven…both heaven and hell are for all eternity. Purgatory at this point will no longer exist. All those souls in purgatory at the end of the world, go body and soul to heaven.

Jesus and Mary are now in heaven body and soul.
T:

The answer is obviously that ALL non-Roman-Catholics ( and Roman-Catholics who have not confessed before death) do not go to Heaven, that is do not partake in the bodily resurrection and eternal life on the new earth.

As I’m sure you know, the Catholic Church is made up of many rites. All fully Catholic. While the Roman rite is ~98% of Catholicism, the other rites which make up the remaining ~2% of the Catholic Church are fully Catholic.
T:

The rest is all speculation and wishful thinking? Or am I mistaken? Perhaps misinterpretation of God’s Mercy?

Maybe someone authoritative could respond?

The Catechism gives a good explanation. While a person’s ignorance is always a wildcard with respect to what they understand or don’t understand, we leave it up to the judgement of God to judge that soul’s level of innocence vs culpability regarding their level of knowledge and ignorance during this life… Bottomline, it is up to God to judge…