Does God know whether I will go to heaven or hell before I was born?

[oldcelt]

We recieved Revelation from God, why should it be unreliable? I AM spoke. And then the Son (“where else would we go”?) and the Spirit came. So you don’t accept revelation, fine, but God revealed, so how is it unreliable?

And I understand you may think I am obsessed about you belonging to someone (that was actually Jude, above, but I am interested too ), but you said you belong to God. So I am then interested in how you can say you belong to God, not knowing if He is personal and not knowing what that means. You seem to know that God is the Creator; isn’t He the master of the creation maybe?

The revelation aspect is quite simple…I don’t believe that it came from God or that the bible is inspired by Him. You believe the opposite and we have equal backing…faith.
Since I exist in a tiny portion of the creation that God began, and am personally descending from that early creative act…I give myself to Him freely. Therefore, I belong to Him. What personal traits He may have I will find out when and if we meet.
So far as Master of Creation…I suppose so…whatever that means. We have peered to the ends of creation and seen nature at work. The Master seems to be at rest and is letting the universe handle itself.

 

[MarcoPG]

The revelation aspect is quite simple…I don’t believe that it came from God or that the bible is inspired by Him. You believe the opposite and we have equal backing…faith.
Since I exist in a tiny portion of the creation that God began, and am personally descending from that early creative act…I give myself to Him freely. Therefore, I belong to Him. What personal traits He may have I will find out when and if we meet.
So far as Master of Creation…I suppose so…whatever that means. We have peered to the ends of creation and seen nature at work. The Master seems to be at rest and is letting the universe handle itself.

I see your position now and I thank you for your explanations. You obviously don’t believe in Jesus logically, am I right?

Relativism is also true for you? If yes, that is where I disagree when you make final statements, because in a relativistic world, a truth is equal to another, that’s all.

 

[oldcelt]

I see your position now and I thank you for your explanations. You obviously don’t believe in Jesus logically, am I right?

Relativism is also true for you? If yes, that is where I disagree when you make final statements, because in a relativistic world, a truth is equal to another, that’s all.

I believe in the existence of Jesus as a great teacher.I think that there is enough evidence to say that the man Jesus walked the earth.
Deists are usually cultural relativists, but there is a great difference between French Deism (radically anti-religion) and Anglo-American Deism (Religiously tolerant). For example, Ben Franklin thought that Jesus, like Socrates, was one the best sources of moral guidance. However, there are no written absolutes of which I am aware.
But, on a discussion board, one is forced to make final statements…at least I can’t think of any way around it.

 

[Bookcat]

God is outside of time. He not so much “foresees” -as “sees” – all of time is before him - all our decisions etc are all freshly before him. He sees what is for us past and present and future - all as present.

Our choices - are part of things. As are the choices of others around us and circumstances that intersect. As is prayer.

Tis very difficult to try to imagine what God sees. But hopefully that will help.

And remember God desires we have true life.

God so loved the world…that he sent his only Son…

So we might have true life!

 

[MarcoPG]

I believe in the existence of Jesus as a great teacher.I think that there is enough evidence to say that the man Jesus walked the earth.
Deists are usually cultural relativists, but there is a great difference between French Deism (radically anti-religion) and Anglo-American Deism (Religiously tolerant). For example, Ben Franklin thought that Jesus, like Socrates, was one the best sources of moral guidance. However, there are no written absolutes of which I am aware.
But, on a discussion board, one is forced to make final statements…at least I can’t think of any way around it.

OK nice.
About making final statements, I would myself use the conditional, or say explicitly that only my opinions is involved. If I talk about something I can’t prove, even as a sustainable opinion, I ask questions or use the conditional, I make hypothesis.
So I don’t feel forced to make final statements or claims when I am in a forum.

But then are there two deists that share the same ideas about God? Or is it like the song “personal Jesus”…where you see God how you like to see it, because you don’t understand how it could be otherwise?

And finally, If Jesus is a great teacher, don’t you have a problem with some of His teachings? (more than just morals: Me and the Father are one, I will send you the Counselor, My Father loves me and I love the Father, If someone loves me he will follow my commandments and we will dwell in him, and so on). If you have to follow many teachers, they will contradict themselves on something. So do you have to choose for yourself? How can you be sure about your ideas? By sure I mean you can track back to something.
Is our Holy Book corrupted, or was it written to fit our vision of God?

 

[oldcelt]

OK nice.
About making final statements, I would myself use the conditional, or say explicitly that only my opinions is involved. If I talk about something I can’t prove, even as a sustainable opinion, I ask questions or use the conditional, I make hypothesis.
So I don’t feel forced to make final statements or claims when I am in a forum.

But then are there two deists that share the same ideas about God? Or is it like the song “personal Jesus”…where you see God how you like to see it, because you don’t understand how it could be otherwise?

And finally, If Jesus is a great teacher, don’t you have a problem with some of His teachings? (more than just morals: Me and the Father are one, I will send you the Counselor, My Father loves me and I love the Father, If someone loves me he will follow my commandments and we will dwell in him, and so on). If you have to follow many teachers, they will contradict themselves on something. So do you have to choose for yourself? How can you be sure about your ideas? By sure I mean you can track back to something.
Is our Holy Book corrupted, or was it written to fit our vision of God?

Statements like “We received revelation from God,” and the rest of that post from you are conditional or followed by a statement of opinion?

Deists agree on the basic character of God as creator. Beyond that, all is open for discussion. Since Jesus wrote nothing personally, that we are aware of, it is difficult to judge the claims of divinity. I personally ignore them along with the miracles, much as Thomas Jefferson did in his version of the New Testament
I don’t think that anyone can be dead sure about their personal conclusions. By profession I write mainly history. I try to find multiple sources about the same event, and the weigh them to the best of my ability. Eventually, I have to draw a conclusion from what is available. When dealing with the supernatural, that is often impossible. We have to decide what we believe or don’t…largely on our own.

So far as your Holy Book(s), I do think that they were assembled to fit a particular purpose. Corrupted…I don’t know that I would go that far.

 

[MarcoPG]

Statements like "We received revelation from God," and the rest of that post from you are conditional or followed by a statement of opinion?

Deists agree on the basic character of God as creator. Beyond that, all is open for discussion. Since Jesus wrote nothing personally, that we are aware of, it is difficult to judge the claims of divinity. I personally ignore them along with the miracles, much as Thomas Jefferson did in his version of the New Testament
I don’t think that anyone can be dead sure about their personal conclusions. By profession I write mainly history. I try to find multiple sources about the same event, and the weigh them to the best of my ability. Eventually, I have to draw a conclusion from what is available. When dealing with the supernatural, that is often impossible. We have to decide what we believe or don’t…largely on our own.

So far as your Holy Book(s), I do think that they were assembled to fit a particular purpose. Corrupted…I don’t know that I would go that far.

No it is not conditional because I rely on sources. It is not a personal opinion, since I have Scripture to base my claim on, that’s a final statement and a proof on sources and arguments from reason. But if I am not sure of something, I don’t write the same.

If it is true that we have to decide on our own, when I say I decide and speak of Faith, I mean I accept Truth, I commit myself to it, I accept to walk side by side with the Truth. Not building my own Truth as i decide, but accepting or rejecting the truth. The nature of truth is to be exclusive, many truths are no truths, they are elements of truth.

Surely it is not with History that you will prove anything supernatural. As stated in the Nt, the pharisees were there too, and Jesus could not do miracles because of their lack of faith. I am nevertheless jealous that you deak with History as a librarian I should be more universal, but Historyis one of my intersts, more than politics for sure

Yes the purpose was and is to have Faith, but it is funny how they resist the test of skepticism, mostly because knowledge of another kind is involded.

 

[oldcelt]

Just learned that a dear friend has passed on in North Carolina…so I will be dropping out.

Thank you all for the interesting conversation. Be well.

John

 

[PutresOmega]

But what if a person doesn’t want to be with God? That is what the Church teaches, that people who go to hell go because they don’t want to be with God. Since He is in Heaven they can’t go there, so they choose hell instead.

Think of it this way: The joining of a husband and wife in marriage through the marital act is a symbol of us being completely joined with Our Lord in Heaven. However, if the wife does not wish to take part in the marital act, the man must refrain from having sex with her. To force her to do so would be rape. Even though he loves her, she must love him also in order for the act to be holy. In this situation, he must honor her wishes and deny his own desires. Likewise, Our Lord cannot unite us fully to Him if we do not desire it as it would be wrong to do so. It is our a choice.

God bless

The Church teaches that those who commit mortal sins and die get kicked into a lake of fire by a merciless tyrant forever, given no purgatory nor any second chances. Doesn’t matter if they understood or agreed with the morality of the sin or not. Many Saints and apparitions seem to hint at the idea that most are in hell and that very few are in heaven. The apparition of Mary at Fatima comes to mind. It has been ten years since I read about it but seem to remember her telling the girls that most were marching into hell and that she was holding back the wrath of God from the world. I have long since discarded these as false (eg I view the Saints as being driven by the problems of their age and the apparition at Fatima being demonic in origin, for example).

I get why the concept of permanent conscious torment filled hell exists. It has existed in almost every faith (Tartarus, the Naraka of Buddhism, etc) so I do get the appeal. We love tormenting each other. We naturally love the idea of being winners while others are losers. It is why we slow down when passing an accident on the road to rubberneck, it is why we love violence in our media and video games, it is why we had things like blood sport and the coliseum, and so on. Hell appeals to the flesh because the flesh loves the idea of tormenting others for the sheer pleasure of tormenting others. The flesh demands revenge, not forgiveness. Thus hell is an extension of flesh into the spiritual realm. That is the conclusion I came to, anyways.

 

[SeekerofTruth27]

Just learned that a dear friend has passed on in North Carolina…so I will be dropping out.

Thank you all for the interesting conversation. Be well.

John

I am sorry for your loss.

I will pray for you and for your friend.

God bless

 

[MarcoPG]

Just learned that a dear friend has passed on in North Carolina…so I will be dropping out.

Thank you all for the interesting conversation. Be well.

John

I am sorry to hear this. Be sure we will think of him and pray for him.

Thank you. I hope to hear from you very soon again.

 

[SeekerofTruth27]

The Church teaches that those who commit mortal sins and die get kicked into a lake of fire by a merciless tyrant forever, given no purgatory nor any second chances. Doesn’t matter if they understood or agreed with the morality of the sin or not. Many Saints and apparitions seem to hint at the idea that most are in hell and that very few are in heaven. The apparition of Mary at Fatima comes to mind. It has been ten years since I read about it but seem to remember her telling the girls that most were marching into hell and that she was holding back the wrath of God from the world. I have long since discarded these as false (eg I view the Saints as being driven by the problems of their age and the apparition at Fatima being demonic in origin, for example).

I get why the concept of permanent conscious torment filled hell exists. It has existed in almost every faith (Tartarus, the Naraka of Buddhism, etc) so I do get the appeal. We love tormenting each other. We naturally love the idea of being winners while others are losers. It is why we slow down when passing an accident on the road to rubberneck, it is why we love violence in our media and video games, it is why we had things like blood sport and the coliseum, and so on. Hell appeals to the flesh because the flesh loves the idea of tormenting others for the sheer pleasure of tormenting others. The flesh demands revenge, not forgiveness. Thus hell is an extension of flesh into the spiritual realm. That is the conclusion I came to, anyways.

Just to clarify, purgatory is not a place of second chances. Purgatory is a place where those who chose God are purged (hence the name) of their sin and their attachment to sin. Take a look at The Logical Case for Purgatory by Matt Fradd

catholic.com/blog/matt-fradd/the-logical-case-for-purgatory

Why do you say that God is merciless and that those who go to hell are not given second chances? Most people are given an entire lifetime of second chances to change their ways. And no one goes to hell without being given a chance to change.

God does consider whether the person knew that what they were doing was wrong. That is why God told us not to judge people (that is His job, we can only judge actions) in Matthew 7:1 and then told us to tell people when they are doing wrong and to forgive them when they repent in Luke 17:3.

Also, look at the Church’s criteria for someone to be guilty of sin:

1. they have to know that it is sinful
2. they have to willfully commit the sin (they have to do it deliberately; accidents don’t count)

For mortal sins, the following must also be present:
3) the sin must be grave (very wrong)
4) they must be aware that the sin is grave (in other words, if they truly believe that it is a venial sin, then they will be judged as though they committed a venial sin)

Also, whether there are many or few people in hell has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not hell exists. That is like saying that if someone believes that most people are in prison, then prison does not exist.

I do not know enough about the Fatima apparitions to discuss what was said by Our Lady, though I do believe that Mary did appear. Why do you believe that it is demonic?

If you don’t mind my asking, do you still consider yourself Catholic, or do you associate with another religion?

God bless

 

[fred_conty]

=SeekerofTruth27
If you don’t mind my asking, do you still consider yourself Catholic, or do you associate with another religion?

PutresOmega
Does God know whether I will go to heaven or hell before I was born?
“This is pretty much what drove me to the concept of Universalism.”

 

[PutresOmega]

Just to clarify, purgatory is not a place of second chances. Purgatory is a place where those who chose God are purged (hence the name) of their sin and their attachment to sin. Take a look at The Logical Case for Purgatory by Matt Fradd

catholic.com/blog/matt-fradd/the-logical-case-for-purgatory

I actually like the idea for purgatory. I just think they should have combined purgatory and hell into a single place called hell rather than stick to that human need to delight in the torment of other people that we are all prone too. Especially when it doesn’t make any sense and actively harms the theology by making God seem petty to those who might otherwise find following Him agreeable.

Why do you say that God is merciless and that those who go to hell are not given second chances? Most people are given an entire lifetime of second chances to change their ways. And no one goes to hell without being given a chance to change.

That is how I was taught. I am certain I am wrong now and you are more correct than what I was taught. Also, a lifetime of second chances isn’t always the case. Sure, some get that but others might just be screwed because they die at the age of fifteen instead of ninety or because they have some mental problem that prevents them from seeing that they are bad people (such as the case with psychopaths, for example). Perhaps I was taught incorrectly though.

God does consider whether the person knew that what they were doing was wrong. That is why God told us not to judge people (that is His job, we can only judge actions) in Matthew 7:1 and then told us to tell people when they are doing wrong and to forgive them when they repent in Luke 17:3.

Thus far we are in complete agreement from this spiritual/theological standpoint.

Also, whether there are many or few people in hell has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not hell exists. That is like saying that if someone believes that most people are in prison, then prison does not exist.

You may have misunderstood my intent in bringing that up. What I meant was that if it were so easy to get into heaven as loving others and not realizing or being convicted of your conscience that something was a sin then surely there would be nobody (or very close to nobody) there. I have never met a person who actually did evil willy-nilly, unless they were a sociopath. I just can’t fathom a truly evil person. It always seems to me that such people already live in hell right here. I can’t reconcile them being punished again for it.

I do not know enough about the Fatima apparitions to discuss what was said by Our Lady, though I do believe that Mary did appear. Why do you believe that it is demonic?

An apparition of Mary appeared to young girls and showed them signs of things to come, visions of hell, and reinforced the idea of sending prayers for those in purgatory. There were a few things that I would call red flags in the story. A couple off the top of my head:

• She mentions holding back the wrath of the Father from the world at one point. Surely the real Mary would know better than to claim she has the power to force or prevent God from doing anything He wished.
• She granted them visions of things to come. Soothsaying and fortune telling is strictly forbidden by the Tanahk. This supposed foreknowledge would negate the concept of free will entirely (if the future can be perfectly foretold then it cannot be changed, thus mankind is saved or doomed based off arbitrary forces and not our own choice, by admission of this supposed Mary apparition).
• She torments children with visions of hell. It is pretty graphic and left the little girls horrified. I have a hard time seeing a mother do something like that to kids.

If you don’t mind my asking, do you still consider yourself Catholic, or do you associate with another religion?

I am not Unitarian, if that is what fred coonty was getting at.

I am Christian, still. I am sort of floating though. My family is a very liberal Catholic who is of the “It is okay that you are gay because the Church will come around” Stephen Colbert camp and while I certainly would like to think that, I don’t like their gray area approach to morality. I am unwilling to return to the Church because I hold heretical views and strongly believe it to be in error on some points. However, I am unwilling to leave the next generation to sift through the ocean of bathwater to fish out all the discarded babies by simply throwing it all out (and my conscience would never allow that, even if I did entertain the idea of doing that).

The Church has a lot of good stuff that benefits the world as far as teaching goes and is closer to the truth than any of the other protestant sects I have explored. Cut away the Aristotelian idolatry and monism, the sexual teaching of the Church at it’s core is perfect. Even the often scoffed at contraception bit has a very good underpinning - don’t use other people as masturbation aides. Respect them and love them. You can’t love someone then turn around and use them like an old gym sock to ejaculate into. I oppose what I see and feel is error but it would be a mistake to call myself anti-Catholic.

tldr I don’t know, really.

God bless

You too.

 

[opusAquinas]

Some are vessels of God’s mercy. Some are vessel’s of God’s justice.

 

[jmcrae]

You may have misunderstood my intent in bringing that up. What I meant was that if it were so easy to get into heaven as loving others and not realizing or being convicted of your conscience that something was a sin then surely there would be nobody (or very close to nobody) there. I have never met a person who actually did evil willy-nilly, unless they were a sociopath. I just can’t fathom a truly evil person. It always seems to me that such people already live in hell right here. I can’t reconcile them being punished again for it.

It may well be that there is nobody or close to nobody in Hell. But it is a lot harder to love people than most of us realize, because we so seldom have to do it.

it’s easy to feel sentimental about people when they aren’t bothering us too much, and when their day-today problems don’t cost us anything, either financially or emotionally.

The test comes when your loved one does something absolutely unacceptable, and you have to decide how to react.

But these cases are in some ways easier than the long haul of day in and day out dealing with a terminal illness, or an addiction.

When you look at the rates of divorce and abortion, it’s a lot harder to avoid the fact that loving others - even those closest to us - is harder than it seems, and actually impossible, for some - who nevertheless would think of themselves as “good people,” generally speaking - meaning that they close their mouths when they chew, they don’t scratch in public, and they like dogs.

 

[opusAquinas]

It may well be that there is nobody or close to nobody in Hell. But it is a lot harder to love people than most of us realize, because we so seldom have to do it.

it’s easy to feel sentimental about people when they aren’t bothering us too much, and when their day-today problems don’t cost us anything, either financially or emotionally.

The test comes when your loved one does something absolutely unacceptable, and you have to decide how to react.

But these cases are in some ways easier than the long haul of day in and day out dealing with a terminal illness, or an addiction.

When you look at the rates of divorce and abortion, it’s a lot harder to avoid the fact that loving others - even those closest to us - is harder than it seems, and actually impossible, for some - who nevertheless would think of themselves as “good people,” generally speaking - meaning that they close their mouths when they chew, they don’t scratch in public, and they like dogs.

There are many sociopaths. There are Catholic sociopaths. My question is God knows there are Catholic sociopaths that cling to the confessional - it is their license to sin. But why does God permit this? (this requires its own post)

firstthings.com/article/2003/05/the-population-of-hell

Hell is well populated in my opinion.

 

[jmcrae]

There are many sociopaths. There are Catholic sociopaths. My question is God knows there are Catholic sociopaths that cling to the confessional - it is their license to sin. But why does God permit this? (this requires its own post)

How would being a sociopath be a license to sin? The inability to feel empathy does not excuse one from the duty to behave correctly. It may not “come naturally” but it is still required. Knowing doesn’t require feeling, and it’s the knowledge of right from wrong that makes one culpable - not how one feels about it.

 

[opusAquinas]

How would being a sociopath be a license to sin? The inability to feel empathy does not excuse one from the duty to behave correctly. It may not “come naturally” but it is still required. Knowing doesn’t require feeling, and it’s the knowledge of right from wrong that makes one culpable - not how one feels about it.

You sin and clingto the confessional say because sociopath wagers that there is a hell and purgatory is only temporary.

 

[jmcrae]

You sin and clingto the confessional say because sociopath wagers that there is a hell and purgatory is only temporary.

An insincere Confession is worse than no Confession at all. Even sociopaths know that.