Do All Catholics Go to Hell?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Babylon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually I think the value of “Do All Catholics Go Hell?” has been overlooked.

From Romans 6:
Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?
4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,
6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.
7 For he who has died has been freed from sin.
8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,
9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him.
Click to expand...
He descended into hell, according to the creed. Did all those united with Him, the living and the dead of the Church, whether already deceased or not yet born, descend with Him, as the unity believers have with Him transcends space and time?
 
The word ‘hell’ in the creed does not refer to the place of the damned. It refers to the underworld where faithful believers were kept until Heaven was opened by the grace of Christ, and the statement is usually taken as a reference to 1 Peter 3:18-20
 
actually it is seperation from God, which is where our Lord did go as He took on the penalty of our Sins. We cannot make light of the fact, that because Jesus our Lord took on our sin, that it means we are free from sin, we are free from the penalty of it, if we are joined with Him - as His disciplines - remaining on the vine. Some would argue that the only ones who are saved, are those believe that they are saved at a point in time, and remained so, with full assurance because the penalty of sin has been paid. This is faulty and unbiblical. Yes, it was paid - and because the price was so High, God dieing for us, and entering hell for us, much then is expected of us - much more than mere assent to the truth or assurance of it- rather it demands a conversion, a lifetime of conversion. Are we assured. When we die in the state of grace - I believe Yes. Until then - ?? Do not speak of hell lightly.
 
JLM316 said:
actually it is seperation from God, which is where our Lord did go as He took on the penalty of our Sins. We cannot make light of the fact, that because Jesus our Lord took on our sin, that it means we are free from sin, we are free from the penalty of it, if we are joined with Him - as His disciplines - remaining on the vine. Some would argue that the only ones who are saved, are those believe that they are saved at a point in time, and remained so, with full assurance because the penalty of sin has been paid. This is faulty and unbiblical. Yes, it was paid - and because the price was so High, God dieing for us, and entering hell for us, much then is expected of us - much more than mere assent to the truth or assurance of it- rather it demands a conversion, a lifetime of conversion. Are we assured. When we die in the state of grace - I believe Yes. Until then - ?? Do not speak of hell lightly.
Click to expand...
Protestants often subscribe to a belief called penal substitution. This belief holds that Jesus atoned for our sins by suffering the very same punishment, in every way, that we deserved - going to Hell. Hell is eternal seperation from God, so they believe that when He died on the cross, Jesus actually went to Hell, and so was seperated from God.

Now there are a lot of problems with this. First, Jesus wasn’t in Hell eternally; He rose on the third day. The answer Protestants will give to this is that since Jesus is infinite, even one second in Hell for Him is enough for all of eternity for us. However, this doesn’t work, because if Jesus was seperated from God, then He wasn’t infinite anymore, and so He couldn’t fulfill eternity in Hell for all of us.

This leads into the real problem with the idea: God is not divisible. God is one God in three Divine Persons - the uncreated Creator. If Jesus ever was seperated from God, that means He would stop being God for a moment, but if He was uncreated, He could not stop being God, because what makes God God is that He is uncreated. That is what seperates God from us - He is uncreated, we are not.

The other thing is that that for one thing to be seperated from something, the two things must be different. If Jesus was seperated from God, then He was different from God, so we would have two Gods, not one.

Suffice it to say, if Jesus was ever seperated from God, that would in some way mean that either He wasn’t really God - He wasn’t really uncreated - or that He is actually different from the God He was seperated from, so we would have polytheism.

Jesus bore our penalty in two ways. One is that He offered satisfaction for it - He atoned for it. He offered in His Sacrifice on Calvary not just His death, but His entire life of perfect obedience to God on our behalf. Because Jesus was fully man, this act pleased the Father so much that He rewarded Jesus with the infinite amount of Grace and mercy necessary to pardon all of our sins.

He also bore our penalty in that He died. In dying, He closed of human nature to death. After the fall, human nature was destined to die. When Christ died, the infinite and uncreated God, He essentially ‘broke’ death, filling up that need for death infinitely. Hence, all those in Him no longer need suffer death.
 
The priests at my church have all gone on spiritual retreats on Hell in the cayman islands my pastor even has a mug as a commemorative 😛
 
jonk said:
I think Bingo is a sin, full stop. I don’t get the point of that silly game at all.
Click to expand...
jrabs said:
Bingo is ONLY a sin if you lose. If you win, then it’s fun.
Click to expand...
Bingo is fine, win or lose.👍
It’s those:cool: Scrabble players that are the real :eek: sinners. Spelling words? Why, that’s what the writers of the Bible did! They spelled words. And so anybody who plays a game that:bigyikes: spells words is setting themselves up as a :bowdown: false prophet, & false prophets are the ones who go to hell.

I thought everybody knew that!!!

(No! I don’t want to take my medicine! If you put that pill in my mouth, I am going tohttp://bestsmileys.com/silly/18.gif bite!! Bite,http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/16.gif I say!!! Dang nurses & doctors!! Think you can pushhttp://bestsmileys.com/expressions/5.gif ***me ***around!!!)
 
Unitas said:
There is nothing wrong with repeating heartfelt prayers. You do not know another man’s heart to know if his prayers are in vain or not.
Click to expand...
Amen! From This Rock magazine:
If it were wrong to use repetitive prayers, Jesus certainly would not have done it. Yet in the garden of Gethsemane, he spoke the same prayer three times: “Leaving them again, he went away and prayed for the third time, saying the same words” (Matt. 26:44). We cannot think of this repetition as anything but heartfelt.

Similarly, in the Old Testament, parts of Psalm 118 are structured around the repeated phrase “His steadfast love endures forever,” and the book of Daniel presents the three men in the fiery furnace constantly repeating the phrase “Sing praise to him and highly exalt him forever” (Dan. 3:52–88). God looks favorably on their prayers and answers them in their time of need (Ps. 118:21; Dan. 3:94–95).

In the New Testament, the book of Revelation describes how the very worship of God in heaven includes words of holy praise that are repeated without end. The four living creatures, gathered around God’s throne, “never cease to sing, ‘Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come!’”(Rev. 4:8). Although trying to manipulate God by vain repetition is always wrong, proper repetitious prayer is very biblical and pleasing to God.
Click to expand...
 
1. Prayer to Mary, the Pope, Saints and anyone NOT named Jesus Christ
2. The Beloved crusifix (abomination)
3. Bingo (sorry, it’s funny, but a sin in the lord’s house)
4. Confession
5. Calling a priest FATHER
Click to expand...
What did you call your Mummy and your Daddy?

Who prays to crucifixes?

Do you have any ornaments in your residential home?

Do you possess artefacts which reflect your culture?

Who gave you the bible?

Whe you read the bible, you are honouring the Catholic Church.

Our parish newsletter is always looking for humour. Please may I quote you for this weeks edition? 😛
Click to expand...
 
  1. Prayer to Mary, the Pope, Saints and anyone NOT named Jesus Christ
  2. The Beloved crusifix (abomination)
  3. Bingo (sorry, it’s funny, but a sin in the lord’s house)
  4. Confession
  5. Calling a priest FATHER
Click to expand...
What did you call your Daddy?

Who prays to crucifixes?

Do you have any ornaments in your residential home?

Do you possess artefacts which reflect your culture?

Who gave you the bible?

Whe you read the bible, you are honouring the Unified Catholic Church.

Our parish newsletter is always looking for humour. Please may I quote you for this weeks edition? 😛
 
Hmm, methinks our friend Babylon, the OP, is a hit-and-runner. Only 2 posts.
 
jack_hawkins said:
My background is Pentecostalism, which is very scripture-based. There is very little difference between Pentecostalism and Catholicism on the things that matter (IMO), therefore if Catholics were going to hell, so would every other Christian.
Click to expand...
Very true, very true.
 
LilyM said:
Hmm, methinks our friend Babylon, the OP, is a hit-and-runner. Only 2 posts.
Click to expand...
I was going to say a jehovah’s witness but i don’t know, he didn’t quote the WatchTower or anything like that. :ehh: :o
 
(Part One)
First Off I would like to say hello to everyone, this will be my first post. I found this thread to be very interesting because these misunderstandings are very popular amongst different religions and organizations out there in the world today; that are outside the Church. One thing that I would like to make very clear is that believe it or not the Bible is a Catholic Book.

catholicapologetics.net/tbcb-index

I have spoke to some people who have brought up the same arguments that you provide, and to be honest I was 19 years at the time and not fully aware of the Catholic Faith. I am always studying now and I have come across an excellent web site that actually has any answer that you could possibly think up. There are a little over 6000 questions answered in four radio replies done in the late thirties to the early fifties. If you are Interested I Highly recommend that you take a look at this site:

Home Page:
catholicapologetics.net

Radio Replies:

catholicapologetics.net/rr-1-2-3.htm

Other interesting online resources by catholicapologetics.net:
catholicapologetics.net/apolo-books.htm

Here is some of the Information that is provided; for instance, you asked about:

“Prayer to Mary, the Pope, Saints and anyone NOT named Jesus Christ”

here would be a reply that was done by Rev. Dr. Leslie Rumble, M.S.C. and Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty:

(3/6 of the questions I have posted on Our Blessed Mother Mary)
  1. It is unscriptural to attribute power to Mary.
    That is a very unscriptural statement. At His mother’s request Jesus changed water into wine at Cana, though He had said, “My time is not yet come.” St. James tells us that “the prayer of a just man availeth much.” Ja. V., 16. How much more the prayer of Mary!
  2. Does the Bible sanction such prayers to Mary?
    Yes. All through the Bible you will find God conferring favors through the prayers of others. In the Old Testament we read of the prayers of Abraham, Moses, and of the various prophets. In the New Testament, St. James tells us to “pray for one another,” in the text I have just quoted. If we must always pray directly to God and may not ask the prayers of others, why did St. Paul write to the Thessalonians, “Pray for us that we may be delivered from importunate and evil men?” 2 Thess. III., 2. Why did he not ask that directly of God, instead of asking the prayers of the Thessalonians? Or would you be more scriptural than the New Testament itself?
  3. There is but one mediator; there is no place for Mary.
    Christ is the principal mediator in His own right. Mary is a secondary mediatrix, through, with, and in Christ. Without Him she would have no power, and therefore He is the source of all mediation with God on behalf of men.
(3/8 of the questions I have posted on devotion to the saints)
  1. Why pray to Saints? Is it not better to pray to God direct?
    Net always. The same answer applies here as in the case of prayers to the Virgin Mary, who after all is the greatest of the Saints. God may wish to give certain favors through the intercession of some given Saint. In such a case, it is better to seek the intercession of that Saint as God wishes. I can decide to give you a gift myself, or to do so through a friend. In the latter case you do me greater honor by accepting it from my friend than by refusing my way of giving it to you, and insolently demanding it directly from myself in person.
  2. I pray that you may see the futility of praying to Saints who can do nothing for you. Christ is the only mediator.
    By your very prayer you are attempting to mediate between God and myself on my behalf. I do not criticize the principle of praying for others. I believe in that. But I do criticize your praying for me in violation of your own principles. If the Saints cannot be mediators by praying for me, nor can you. Your prayers would be futile; they could do nothing for me; and you would be wasting your time.
  3. The Lord’s Prayer shows that God Himself hears our prayers.
    Correct. And He hears the prayers we address to the Saints, and their prayers also on our behalf. And those prayers, added to our own, give us additional claims to be heard by God in a favorable way.
 
(Part Two)
1438. Why do Catholics worship relics of Saints?
They do not worship relics as they worship God, by adoration. If you mean worship in the sense of honor or veneration, then Catholics certainly venerate the relics of Saints. The law, “Honor thy father and thy mother” extends to their persons, body and soul; to their reputations, and to all connected with them. We reverence their remains even after death. And if we are not to venerate the remains and relics of the Saints who have been so entirely consecrated to God, are we to desecrate them? Or are we to be blandly indifferent to them as to the bleached bones of some dead animal lying in the fields? The Catholic doctrine, forbidding adoration, yet commanding respect and veneration, is the only possible Christian conduct.
  1. Are not relics received and venerated without a particle of proof that they are genuine?
    No. The Catholic Church is very prudent in this matter, and her law declares that those relics alone may be publicly venerated which have authentic documents accompanying them, and proving them to be genuine. These documents can be given only by one authorized by the Holy See to grant them. If the documents be lost, no relic may be offered for public veneration by the faithful without a special decree from a Bishop who can guarantee the relic as genuine. But even should a Catholic venerate as a relic some object which is not authentic, such veneration is at least well meant, and directed towards the one whom the object is believed to represent.
Calling a priest FATHER

39. “Call No Man Father”?
Why do Catholics call their priests “Father” when the Bible says . . . “Call no one on earth your father; for one is your Father, who is in Heaven.” (Matt. XXIII, 9).

Catholics call their priest “Father”:

I. Because he IS a Spiritual Father to them.
(a) In infancy he baptized them and, therefore, was the instrument . . . the agency . . . of their spiritual REBIRTH just as the physical fathers of Catholics are responsible for their PHYSICAL birth.

(b) He gives them spiritual FOOD for their souls whenever they receive the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion. “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.” (Jn. VI, 57). PROVIDING NOURISHMENT IS ANOTHER OBLIGATION OF A FATHER.

(c) In confession, the priest not only forgives sin in the name of Christ, but also ADVISES them as to the best way to overcome their difficulties . . . spiritual and material. THIS, TOO, IS THE DUTY OF A FATHER.

(d) Like a father, the priest is always at the death-bed of a Catholic to console and assist him. No Catholic would WANT to die without a priest – HIS SPIRITUAL FATHER – beside him.

Therefore, a priest does not DEMAND this title. Catholics call him “Father” as a sign of the affection he shares with their natural parents, and because he shares with them the duties and obligations of a parent.

II. Because the Bible does not mean that NO man should be called “Father.”
  1. Cruden’s Concordance (which is a non-Catholic concordance) at the beginning of the citation under the word “father” says:
    “In addition to its common use, this word is also used in the sense of seniors . . . of ancestors . . . founders of trades or professions . . . head of the inhabitants of a town, etc.”
    The word "Father” is found almost a 1000 times and only about half of these refer to God. The others refer to HUMAN BEINGS who are called “Father.”
  2. It was not the intention of Christ that NO man should be called “Father.”
    (a) In Matthew XIII, 1-3 . . . He is admonishing the people to follow the teachings of the Pharisees . . . but not their example: “But do not act according to their works.”
    According to these verses, no master is to be followed who would lead us away from Christ.
    (b) Christ Himself permitted and used the word FOR OTHERS than God.
    (a) In John 4:12, He did not correct the Samaritan woman who said: “Art thou greater than our father Jacob who gave us the well? . . .”
    (b) In John 8:56, He Himself used the term, for Abraham: "Abraham your father rejoiced that he was to see my day . . .
  3. Saint Paul, following the example of Christ, did not take these words in their literal sense.
    (a) He calls the Corinthians his spiritual children: “For although you have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet you have not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, through the gospel, did I beget you.” (1 Cor. 4:15)
    (b) He calls Timothy his “beloved SON in the faith.” (1 Tim. 1:2)
    (c) He speaks of the Corinthians as his CHILDREN: “. . . but I admonish you as my dearest children.” (1 Cor. 4:14)
    (d) He tells the Philippians that the proof of Timothy’s loyalty is to be found in the fact that he had served Paul in the Gospel as “a Son with the FATHER.” (Phil. 2:22)
    (e) See also: 1 Thes. 2:11.
 
(Part Three)
III. If we adhere to the literal interpretation:
  1. All honorary titles would be forbidden. Judges, mayors, etc., could not be called “Your Honor.” Presidents, ambassadors, etc., could not be called “Your Excellency.”
  2. Physicians could not be called 'Doctor" and ministers could not be called “Reverend.”
  3. We could not call our own male parent “Father” for there would be no exceptions under the literal interpretation.
  4. Likewise we could no longer call Washington the “Father of the Country.”
  5. We could not use the expression “Mister” for this is equivalent to “Master” and the same text says, “Neither be ye called masters. …”
  6. Nor could we use the term “Sir” for this is a contraction of “Sire” which means “Lord” or “Master.”
THEREFORE, this text of St. Matthew is not to be taken literally or as a general law. Catholic priests do not DEMAND this title. It is for them a source of HUMILITY rather than of PRIDE, for it reminds the priest of his OBLIGATIONS as a spiritual FATHER to his flock.

Confession
  1. What is Confession?
    Confession is a Sacrament instituted by Jesus Christ by which those who fall into sin after Baptism may be restored to God’s grace. Confession is called the Sacrament of Penance because it supposes that the recipient is truly repentant of his sins. It involves the admission of one’s sins made to a duly approved Priest in order to obtain absolution.
  2. All men are equal. How can a Priest set himself above others and presume to be their judge?
    All men equally share a common humanity, but not all are equal in office and responsibility. Also no man could have the right to set himself above others in this matter. If Christ had not endowed His Priests with power to forgive sin they could not possess it. But He endowed them with this power, and they forgive sin not in their own name but in the name of Christ. A criminal has to answer to the state for his crimes against civil law. How then can a fellow citizen act as judge and pass sentence upon him? In his official capacity he is delegated by the state and acts in the name of the state. Now Christ died to pay the price of our sins and He surely has the right to say how forgiveness shall be applied. We cannot deny the right of Christ to administer forgiveness through agents of His own choosing, nor can we insist that He must forgive us on our conditions whilst we ignore His conditions.
  3. We Protestants believe that God alone can forgive sin.
    And that is the Catholic teaching also. But the question concerns the way in which God has chosen to administer that forgiveness. We Catholics add that God can delegate His power if He wishes, just as the supreme authority in the state can delegate a judge to administer justice. Would you deny to God that power?
  4. But can you prove that God did delegate that power to men?
    Yes. Christ was God, and in St. Jn. XX., 21-23 we read these remarkable words, “As the Father hath sent Me I also send you. When He said this He breathed on them; and He said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” Now Christ’s mission was to destroy sin, and He gave that same mission to His Apostles. Knowing that their merely human power as men was quite insufficient, He gave them a special communication of the Holy Spirit for this special work. To say that Christ did not confer a true power to forgive sin is to rob the whole ceremony and the words of Christ of any real meaning. And it was obviously a power to be exercised, Christians applying to the Apostles for forgiveness.
More at catholicapologetics.net/rr1q823-854

Sorry for dragging this post out so long I just wanted to get some good information across. This site should Help out a lot, a word of caution though, be careful of heretical sites they can lead you the wrong way big time.
 
God help us!
I’m sick and tired of these extremist Protestant circles spreading their anti-Catholic vile.
I can’t believe how easy it is to spread lies!
Poor gullable child…
 
Zooey said:
Now, around here, it’s the VFW that runs all the Bingo!! The volunteer firefighters have something called “Feather Parties”!! Mind you, I have no idea what a Feather Party is, but it sounds like something that they probably did in:bigyikes: ancient Babylon!! I think they get http://bestsmileys.com/drinking/2.gif & raffle off

http://bestsmileys.com/music1/7.gif...sic1/8.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/music1/9.gif

or something.
Click to expand...
Love your Chic rock band! 😃

I just read a thread on this forum which said some Catholic Churches still have bingo in their churches. It depends on that particular churches preference. The thread also said that bingo was very common years ago in the church as a whole. I personally don’t care if Catholics have bingo or any other type of gambling in their churches but you guys aren’t very consistent in what you have said about the subject. Some people say bingo was never allowed in Catholic Churches while others say they are still using it in theirs…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top