Can one be morally depraved beyond redemption?

[FaithBuild18]

I could have sworn I was told growing up that we can always be saved, and will always been forgiven if we ask for forgiveness from the Lord.

But if that’s true, why then did God order people to kill others, and in some cases exterminate entire peoples in the OT?

Even if people can indeed be depraved beyond redemption, which seems like the classical explanation of why God gave such orders in the OT, I still struggle to reconcile the extermination of tribes and ethnic groups in the OT with this:

CCC 2312
Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.

Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions. Blind obedience does not suffice to excuse those who carry them out. Thus the extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin. One is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide

 

[George_Stegmeir]

I don’t know who has been influencing your thinking, or if you are just set on arguing,
but you are forgetting a basic tenet of our Catholic Faith: There is no sin that you can commit, no matter how horrendous the deed, that it won’t be forgiven if you are truely sorry.
No matter how evil or dissolute your life was, if you say with your dying breath: “Lord have mercy on me, a sinner”, you will be saved…You may stay in Purgatory until Judgement Day, but you won’t go to Hell. Basic Roman Catholic Doctrine.

 

[FallingBlossom]

Admittedly I’m not very good with theology, so I may be wrong when I say this.

God is meant to be infinite mercy, right? I think perhaps the reason that people got killed off by God’s orders was because, had they continued to live any longer, their eternal situation may have ended up worse than it already was.

Bodily health is, to God, subordinate to the health of a person’s soul.

Secondly, God forgives people for their sins as long as they actually want to be forgiven. A priest once gave the analogy of the human soul being like a window, with the sunlight shining through it being grace. The more dirt that collects on that window and the less often it gets cleaned, the less light gets through. Someone who is “morally depraved” may have less chance of being forgiven just because they don’t really want to be forgiven, or because they think they’re too far gone to be forgiven (despair), not because God Himself doesn’t want to. The grace to know themselves and to be sorry for what they’ve done becomes harder and harder to take a hold of, the more “morally depraved” the person is. Their windows were too dirty.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

I don’t know who has been influencing your thinking, or if you are just set on arguing,
but you are forgetting a basic tenet of our Catholic Faith: There is no sin that you can commit, no matter how horrendous the deed, that it won’t be forgiven if you are truely sorry.
No matter how evil or dissolute your life was, if you say with your dying breath: “Lord have mercy on me, a sinner”, you will be saved…You may stay in Purgatory until Judgement Day, but you won’t go to Hell. Basic Roman Catholic Doctrine.

You’re neglecting the need for Catholics to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Without that, there is ordinarily no guarantee of forgiveness.

Peace,
Dante

 

[Elizabeth502]

Despite what Michael Corleone uttered in Godfather III, no one is “beyond redemption.”

 

[LB_in_TX]

Consider the pre-Christian life of Saint Paul. He had acquired a zealot’s hatred of all Jesus stood for, as he began to harass His followers.

Sinner to Saint

 

[fbl9]

I could have sworn I was told growing up that we can always be saved, and will always been forgiven if we ask for forgiveness from the Lord.

But if that’s true, why then did God order people to kill others, and in some cases exterminate entire peoples in the OT?

Even if people can indeed be depraved beyond redemption, which seems like the classical explanation of why God gave such orders in the OT, I still struggle to reconcile the extermination of tribes and ethnic groups in the OT with this:

CCC 2312
Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.

Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions. Blind obedience does not suffice to excuse those who carry them out. Thus the extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin. One is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide

God has not decreed such things since the time of Christ.During Christ’s time in hell He taught those there.So these persons where given the opportunity to see their sins and repent of them.It’s not like the death of the flesh is the end of it all.

One can be so morally depraved that they reject redemption but are not beyond being redemeded for if Christ can not redem some one His sacrifice was not sufficent.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

No one living person is beyond redemption. But God already knows who will go down the path that will take them there. Since God already knows who will be redeemed, and since God is just, we can be sure that He takes such things into account.

Now, as to the biblical accounts of “the ban,” there are two points you need to consider. First the literal: The CCC tells us to refuse such immoral orders from humans, because humans have no authority to command the death of innocent humans (or guilt humans for that matter, we simply follow the rules God’s already given us). God does have that authority. We exist because God made us, we continue to exist because God actively wills it. There is no reason external to God to cause God not to do as He will with us.

Second: Father Barron recommends reading such passages on a different level. I couldn’t find a link to the video where he goes over it (he says it better than I can), but I’ll go ahead and try to summarize what he said:

The passage has God order the Jews to wipe out an entire tribe, including its king, cattle, etc. Saul keeps the king and some other stuff alive. This is not considered good enough, and Samuel kills the king and orders the completion of the task.

Fr. Barron recommends this approach to the passage: the tribe that the Jews are ordered to wipe out shows up many times in genesis. The tribe represents sin. The Jews have been struggling with this tribe (sin) for some time. Finally, God orders them to wipe out the tribe (sin) entirely. So they go to battle and are victorious. Then Samuel comes in and sees that they got rid of most of the tribe (sin), but really, really want to keep some of it around because it’s nice. Saul seems to be saying that the tribe (sin) has been beaten and is under control, isn’t it ok to keep the remnants around and enjoy the benefits, since the cows are so nice and keeping this part over here will raise our status among others?

The answer is of course no. Sin must be destroyed entirely, it’s no good to keep a little around for its benefits.

So two answers for you there: if it’s literal, God had the right, but the story is presented to us not just to tell us that the Israelites killed off some tribe thousands of years ago that no one would otherwise even care to remember the name of, but to teach us a lesson. It is the lesson that should be the focus, not the medium through which it is presented to us.