P
- Status
T
truthseeker32
Guest
This is a very good question, one that has made me consider reverting to Mormonism or adopting Eastern religion, since the idea that this very short life has such vast cosmic consequences seems strange. It makes a lot more sense that this short life we are experiencing right now is just one small fragment of a series of lives or an eternal existence.
And why should death end that opportunity?
S
Scottgun
Guest
Heaven is an eternal monument of God’s Mercy and Love. Hell is an eternal monument of His Justice. Love without Justice isn’t Love at all.
P
Philthy
Guest
“It seems strange” is hardly a foundation to build upon, and I’m not sure how Mormonism or Eastern religion solves the problem. I can tell you that your complaining about how God has chosen to order his creation is nothing new. Paul was dealing with it 2000 years ago. Romans 9: But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”
Really? Why, exactly - because you like the idea? Why would we not simply put it off in the next life just as we do during this life? It sounds like an excuse - a procrastination - to avoid doing the good you recognize as good right now.
I don’t know - why shouldn’t you just be God and rule the universe and eternity as you see fit? Why don’t we all just die and life ends and there’s nothing more to deal with? You are asking good questions, but you do need to realize - as I have repeatedly said - that the “why” of some of it simply remains a mystery. Your ability to question why an alternative - based upon our profoundly limited perspective - is not a justification for calling into question that which God has revealed. As St Paul said: 1Cor 13:12"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully…" Emphasis and underlining mine. The “now” he speaks of is this earthly life, the “then” is on the other side of eternity. It is an articulation of what I’ve been trying to say: we don’t have all the answers now - just enough to know that we do need to choose properly:
Deut 30:15-20 "See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live… But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish.
We must choose and our choice matters…
C
CompSciGuy
Guest
Let me tell you what you do. You preach the gospel. You repent of your own sins. And you trust in not only the mercy, but also the JUSTICE of our Lord as judge of all human beings. It is not for you to worry about who is going to hell and who is not, or to make God’s judgments for him. It is for you to trust and obey and leave the judging up to God.
H
Hypnotoad
Guest
You’re right, it’s actually hypocritical to think you should get an eternal reward for a good life and a temporary punishment for a bad life, even though the Good you have opposed with your bad life is an eternal one; God. Don’t you understand that devils and souls in Hell do not want to be near God for the very reason that they oppose His very nature! An obstinate sinner is tormented by the light of God as a person living in a dark cave for 50 years would be tormented by the light of the sun. To them they are gods, just like we profess ourselves to be every time we commit a mortal sin.
M
MattofTexas
Guest
I think it’s important to recognize that should the Fall have not occurred then there wouldn’t be a “this life” and “afterlife” there would just be a life. We live here in this Earth because God created human beings to live on and rule the Earth, and this was good. Then Adam and Eve sinned and became subject to death, which all if their offspring have inherited. The Good News is that God is restoring His creation to goodness. So this life isn’t in vain or just some test, but rather is the infancy of our life in God’s creation. We live as sinners but God offers us redemption and the hope if one day living on the New Earth in the New Jerusalem. I know it might seem storage to think that God would judge us based on such a short period if time in this fallen world, but keep in mind this is a great act of mercy! He could have executed Adam and Eve for their transgression on the spot, but he didn’t. Likewise he spares all of us the just punishment our sins merit (at least for now), and instead is patient that we might be led to repentance and by His grace be made good. Those who choose not to repent will receive the penalty of their sins, but those who do will be saved by grace. So it’s not about God punishing people for not choosing the right religion, it’s about God being mericful to those who cry out to Him for mercy and strive to live His will. If one recognizes that we are no more ontologically the same as God than a self-portrait is to the artist who painted it (paint and canvas is not a human being no matter how much it might resemble one, likewise while humans are made in God’s image this does not make our being like His) then we see that God’s salvation is a great act of love and grace, not merely paying what is owed. As such it is proper for us to thank God for saving some of us, not complain because He respects the free will He created us with and lets some choose to go to destruction.
T
truthseeker32
Guest
I never claimed that we deserve heaven. My argument is more that we don’t deserve Hell. If we step outside Catholic doctrine for a second we can entertain the idea that there are other possibilities. For example, God could simply annihilate those he sees as unfit for his kingdom. That way the individual wouldn’t have to endure unending suffering, and he wouldn’t get a reward he doesn’t deserve, or reincarnation is a possibility. God could let the person suffer through a mortal existence until they figure it out. I want you to honestly ask yourself which seems the better option: 1) A soul gets a short period in which to avoid Mortal Sin and this determines his eternal fate, or 2) God so loves us that he always leaves the door open. It may take a billion years for a soul to find their way back, but God will never close the door. The idea that God is simply putting us through a test that we either pass or fail is barbaric. The Eastern Orthodox view that God’s primary objective is to heal us rather than condemn us makes so much more sense if God is truly love.
T
truthseeker32
Guest
Could God have just destroyed Adam and Eve? Could a perfectly good God do such a thing? It seems to me like God shares some of the blame. Sure, we can choose whether to sin or not, but God is responsible for getting creation going in the first place. He knew Adam and Eve would fall, he knew the holocaust would happen, he knew the U.S. would bomb Hiroshima, and yet he allowed it all to take place anyways, and according to some, the end result of this difficult human existence for most souls is eternal torment. If this doesn’t cause people here discomfort I will have to retire from this thread and find more compassionate conversation partners.
P
Philthy
Guest
I think you just got through suggesting that He could when you said this:
And, in addition, he wouldn’t have paid a price for the evil he had done. Is that truly just?
Again, there’s an element of mystery here - why would God create anything? We don’t really understand why. Your perception that it was a bad thing that he created anyway is a limited perspective. I’m sure that those in Heaven are very glad that He decided to create them - Ive not heard whether those in Hell wish to be annihilated - there life may be somewhat closer to a life here on earth separated from God. Few of those people wish to be eliminated from existence, so it’s hard for us to understand the great balancing act of whether creation was “good” or not.
No one knows whether most people go to Heaven or Hell. I’m pretty sure there was a Saint who revealed revelation on this and the revelation was that most people go to Purgatory and then to Heaven.
Of course it causes discomfort - who claimed otherwise? What you are perhaps confusing a lack of compassion with is a disagreement with your perception. If in searching for truth you wish to simply speak to those who agree with you then what does that say about your alleged search? I completely understand your uneasiness with the concept of Hell and frustration with your inability to understand why God has ordered creation and eternity as He has. But the problem is that we simply lack so much information and have such limited intellect and a distinct bias due to the fall that we cannot rely entirely on our feelings and even some of our intellectual stumbling blocks. It’s important to anchor ourselves in what has been revealed and even then we are required to exercise faith at those points when our reason cannot penetrate beyond the veil. Peter demonstrated this humble approach at the conclusion of the Bread of Life discourse (John 6)…
John6 with my editing said:
Jesus’ “flesh is of no avail” comment is a reference to the fleshly, or carnal way of trying to understand Him: ie human logic and intellect alone. He must be understood through faith guided by the Holy Spirit.
John 6:
Do we Matt - Do we want to leave because we can’t understand? Part of us does, but this part needs to recognize that we are not God and we are not even close to having all the information as He is…
John 6:
And that, my friend, is the foundation of our faith. Faith in Christ and faith in what He said and what He continues to say through the Church He founded to “make disciples of all nations …teaching them all I have commanded you…” So the fundamental question begins with, “Do you have faith in Jesus Christ?”
Start there and build upon that foundation…
Blessings
G
Goya
Guest
Why do you insist on blaming the Catholic Church, for Hell? The Church didn’t invent Hell. Again, as this seems to have been lost on you: our Faith is based on what has been Revealed to us–not on what we wish had been revealed. Christ–Jesus Christ–spoke very cleary of HELL, more often than he spoke of Heaven.
Your gripe isn’t with the Catholic Church–much as you’d like us all to believe it is, and as convenient a target as the Catholic Church may be–or even with her teachings on HELL–your gripe, is with Jesus Christ. Now, I don’t know much about mormonism–but I do know, that they accept the Bible in its entirety (well, the protestant abbreviation of the actual Bible, but let’s set that issue aside for the moment)—and that Bible contains the exact same references to Hell, as the Catholic Church’s Bible–upon which her teachings on Hell, are based.
So you say you are thinking about going back to mormonism–am I therefore to surmise that the Book of Mormon has somehow pretended to soften the meaning, severity, or permanancy of Hell?
If so, are you sufficiently convinced with their authority to do so? Seems you arleady had doubts about their authority, based on other lies you discovered they told.
Are you willing to stake eternal damnation on a source you yourself have proven to be a liar? Just because it doesn’t feel right???
Knock yourself out sir–but do not expect much ‘mitigation’, when you find yourself at the ‘pearly gates’, pleading your case, and your whole arguement comes down to:
“…well yeah, I knew mormonism was full of it, but their teaching about Hell just felt like it was nicer–certainly more so, than those mean 'ol meany mean Catholics, and the nastiness that Jesus Christ actually said about Hell, according to the Bible…”.
This is Truth we are talking about, ‘Truthseeker’–the ultimate, eternal Truth. Are you actually seeking Truth, as your moniker/handle implies, or are you rather hoping you can negotiate and compromise with it?
G
Goya
Guest
btw:
From the CCC, in turn, citing Christ Jesus Himself:
137 Cf. John Paul II, DeV 46.
Anyone come to mind? Perhaps, Judas Iscariot?
Recall Jesus saying it would be better for him not to have been born?
Yet, Simon Peter, who would go on to deny him three times, would become the "Rock’ upon which He built His Church.
The difference?
Judas committed suicide–and therefore “…deliberately refused to accept his mercy by repenting, [and] reject[ed] the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit.”
Contrast: St. Peter repented, and begged the Lord’s forgiveness. And accepted His mercy.
See how cleanly Pope John Paul II’s words fit this example? This is but one small example of how Catholic teaching --on Hell, in this case–is firmly grounded in scripture.
Would you rather the Catholic Church said something along the lines of–"…well, Judas wasn’t a bad guy; probably needed money…and we should give him props for the guilt he felt, and how he just killed himself, rather than burdening the world the with the likes of him…and therefore he probably didn’t go to Hell… why that would just be mean."
Perhaps you’d rather…but Truth requires otherwise.
From the CCC, in turn, citing Christ Jesus Himself:
136= Mt 12:31; cf. Mk 3:29; Lk 12:10.
137 Cf. John Paul II, DeV 46.
Anyone come to mind? Perhaps, Judas Iscariot?
Recall Jesus saying it would be better for him not to have been born?
Yet, Simon Peter, who would go on to deny him three times, would become the "Rock’ upon which He built His Church.
The difference?
Judas committed suicide–and therefore “…deliberately refused to accept his mercy by repenting, [and] reject[ed] the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit.”
Contrast: St. Peter repented, and begged the Lord’s forgiveness. And accepted His mercy.
See how cleanly Pope John Paul II’s words fit this example? This is but one small example of how Catholic teaching --on Hell, in this case–is firmly grounded in scripture.
Would you rather the Catholic Church said something along the lines of–"…well, Judas wasn’t a bad guy; probably needed money…and we should give him props for the guilt he felt, and how he just killed himself, rather than burdening the world the with the likes of him…and therefore he probably didn’t go to Hell… why that would just be mean."
Perhaps you’d rather…but Truth requires otherwise.
G
Goya
Guest
^^^to clarify–the reason for my example above:
The main reason I posted that particular cite to the CCC, was because of the reference to the language in Matthew–to underscore the point that according to the Bible (and echoed by the Catholic Church)–the only unforgivable sin–is 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’.
But what does ‘blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’ mean? The Catholic Church gives us a pretty good idea of what CHRIST’S WORDS mean here–rather than 10,000+ protestant interpretations, of what this or that pastor believes Chirst meant with that passage.
…and I put the Church’s ‘model’ to the test–against scripture itself.
FWIW.
The main reason I posted that particular cite to the CCC, was because of the reference to the language in Matthew–to underscore the point that according to the Bible (and echoed by the Catholic Church)–the only unforgivable sin–is 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’.
But what does ‘blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’ mean? The Catholic Church gives us a pretty good idea of what CHRIST’S WORDS mean here–rather than 10,000+ protestant interpretations, of what this or that pastor believes Chirst meant with that passage.
…and I put the Church’s ‘model’ to the test–against scripture itself.
FWIW.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Your understanding is correct.
- Status