C
Charlemagne_III
Guest
And by how we die.Belief is not determined by what we profess but how we live.

Or, as Pascal put it, by living as though we had eight hours left to live.
And by how we die.Belief is not determined by what we profess but how we live.
I was not suggesting that you test God. I was suggesting testing yourself and your beliefs.No. āTestingā God as you suggest is the grave sin of presumption.
This is true. Most people choose the statements that they want (the ones that favor them) and take them literally.ā¦The Bible is not the kind of book that can be read cold, with no prior theological understanding or instruction. Itās not a cookbook or science book, it speaks of the mysteries of God, which need proper discernment and application.
Well, since Catholics already know about purgatory, I donāt think that would be new stuff!I recommend reading the book (unless you are too afraid to learn new stuff). I believe there is a pdf verson online.
Ah, but that is exactly what you were asking us to do. No. God is not to be treated like a vending machine. We serve him out of love. We do not put him to the test just to see if what we believe is right or not. God has revealed his truth in Christ. We trust that because Christ rose from the dead. Thatās all the proof we need.I was not suggesting that you test God. I was suggesting testing yourself and your beliefs.
This is true. Most people choose the statements that they want (the ones that favor them) and take them literally.
Iāve read many other books besides the Bibleāmany that may surprise those who believe that Catholics are limited in what they may read.Also, it does not hurt to read other books besides the Bible and try to learn from them.
If Catholics are not bound to believe what our own saints have described about heaven, why should we read this guyās book? What are his statements based on? How can he possibly know what happens to a person after death? What makes him an authority on the topic? No one can āknowā what happens to anyone after death except through some kind of spiritual experience or listening to those who claim to have had them. It might be interesting to read, but it carries no authoritative weight.An interesting book is one named āThe Soulās Journeyā by Peter Richelieu. In it he describes what happens to a person after death and the planes or realms he passes through.
No one who is in heaven, or even purgatory would be concerned to see others there they didnāt expect to see. Rather they would rejoice that 1) they are there themselves and 2) that others who they thought might not be there are there. Why? Because we all hope for heaven and would be thrilled for anyone else we find there. I suggest you read, if you havenāt, C. S. Lewisā āThe Great Divorceā for some good thoughts on this idea.One thing the author talks about are some very firm, devout Christians who find themselves in a place which they believe to be heaven but they are all very disappointed to find many non-believers also in the same place. The real joke is that the place, they believe is heaven, is actually just the upper regions of purgatory, so they actually have not reached heaven yet.
I recommend reading the book (unless you are too afraid to learn new stuff). I believe there is a pdf verson online.
Actually there is a safer way to do this. If we have faith we can say to a tree (or mountain) ābe uprooted and tossed into the seaāā¦If that doesnāt work, itās a safe bet not to try poison.I was not suggesting that you test God. I was suggesting testing yourself and your beliefs.
I think it is mainly fear that keeps people from exploring views other than that of their own religion. It is much much safer to live in an echo chamber of your own beliefs.So Iām āafraidā if I donāt care to read some random personās book? I learn ānew stuffā every day. Some worth integrating into my life and others not. I think I am mature enough to know which is which.
For some no doubt this is true, but itās not the Catholic way of looking at the world around us.I think it is mainly fear that keeps people from exploring views other than that of their own religion. It is much much safer to live in an echo chamber of your own beliefs.
I was discussing God today with a friend, and he happens to be an atheist. He believes all religions teah the same basic principles (peacefulness, good character, morality, etc) and that all that is needed for āsalvationā is to be a good person. He canāt believe that I believe people like Ghandi and atheists that help the community and are good people would most likely not go to heaven (although I know I cannot judge who will or will not).
So it guess itās a fair question he is posing: Why do we believe that one has to accept Jesus as his savior and follow the teachings of the Catholic Church to get to heaven? Why canāt someone who is an atheist but who does good deeds every day reach heaven?
Some people that say they believe in God and are not good people they believe with their mouths only.
If a person says with their mouths that they dont believe in God, and are good people they too are deceiving themselves by calling themselves atheists.
Thanks and God bless!
I was never afraid to read any book. I just put the book down when I realize it really isnāt worth reading. Many Christian writers are converts. They discovered that reading Catholic literature was really something they should never have been afraid to do. C.S. Lewis, for example, was in part converted by reading G.K. Chesterton, who was also a convert.I think it is mainly fear that keeps people from exploring views other than that of their own religion. It is much much safer to live in an echo chamber of your own beliefs.
I second reading Chesterton. The text of many of his writings can be found online: cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mward/gkc/books/index.html.I was never afraid to read any book. I just put the book down when I realize it really isnāt worth reading. Many Christian writers are converts. They discovered that reading Catholic literature was really something they should never have been afraid to do. C.S. Lewis, for example, was in part converted by reading G.K. Chesterton, who was also a convert.
If you are not afraid to do so, I suggest you try reading some Chesterton. Orthodoxy would be a good place to start.
Actually there is a safer way to do this. If we have faith we can say to a tree (or mountain) ābe uprooted and tossed into the seaāā¦If that doesnāt work, itās a safe bet not to try poison.
For myself I already know how weak I amā¦I pray more for guidance and mercyā¦And I try to simply Trust God where I am nowā¦for I am very small spiritually
HI JRKH
I tried to reply, I am using a tablet and it never shows a full post, to reply to, it makes it hard to reply. What am I doing wrong.
I know I am replying in the middle of your post.
I just want to say I agree wiith you. It is a humble attitude.
I know of ourselves we can do nothing , my prayer is the lords prayer.
Bravo, Charlie! In some cases how we die is far more significant than how we live.And by how we die.
Or, as Pascal put it, by living as though we had eight hours left to live.
There is a vast difference between tempting Providence and trusting Providence.Sure, Hindus believe in miracles. But if you believe you are special and that you deserve a miracle, you probably wonāt be granted one.
But firm believers in Mark 16:16, should definitely test Mark16:18 .
Sure helping the sick like Jesus is useful and makes sense, but feeling somehow superior by spouting Mark 16:16 will not get you any closer to heaven. I only suggest checking Mark16:17-18 for people who do that.There is a vast difference between tempting Providence and trusting Providence.
It serves no useful purpose to pick up dangerous snakes or drink deadly poison but it does make sense to follow the example of Jesus and pray for sick people.
Spouting Bible verses most certainly does not equate to salvation. Obeying God does.Sure helping the sick like Jesus is useful and makes sense, but feeling somehow superior by spouting Mark 16:16 will not get you any closer to heaven. I only suggest checking Mark16:17-18 for people who do that.
That makes sense. Jesus was quite literal in Mark 16:16 and then he become metaphorical in 16:17 and by 16:18 he was totally metaphorical.Spouting Bible verses most certainly does not equate to salvation. Obeying God does.
Why would anyone feel āsuperiorā for āspoutingā Mk. 16:16? Salvation is not a matter of ego, but obedience. And I have already explained that Jesus is using metaphors in verses 17-18. Truly though, if one is not dependent on God but rather thinks they can ātake up serpentsā or drink poison to prove their faith they very well might have to face the consequences of trying God instead of trusting God. Many have done so to their cost, poor things.
I am afraid reading about it is not the answere, one must experience it .That makes sense. Jesus was quite literal in Mark 16:16 and then he become metaphorical in 16:17 and by 16:18 he was totally metaphorical.
I think we have to wait for the Christ to Return, before questions about salvation and who is saved get answered properly. I believe that will happen in the next 2-3 years so we donāt have to wait that long. If you really want to get some hints before that I still suggest you read Soulās Journey by Peter Richelieu : facebook.com/ASoulsJourneyBook
Itās been demonstrated many times that religion, as such, is not a pre-requisite for goodness. And often, atrocities have been committed in the name of God. Religion and goodness do not necessarily correlate. Other factors supersede belonging to or even practicing a faith. This, from Marcus Aurelius, seems to cover it all:I was discussing God today with a friend, and he happens to be an atheist. He believes all religions teah the same basic principles (peacefulness, good character, morality, etc) and that all that is needed for āsalvationā is to be a good person. He canāt believe that I believe people like Ghandi and atheists that help the community and are good people would most likely not go to heaven (although I know I cannot judge who will or will not).
So it guess itās a fair question he is posing: Why do we believe that one has to accept Jesus as his savior and follow the teachings of the Catholic Church to get to heaven? Why canāt someone who is an atheist but who does good deeds every day reach heaven?
Thanks and God bless!
āLive a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.ā
Yes, one must overcome their fallen natures. Religion and surface goodness does not fool God.Itās been demonstrated many times that religion, as such, is not a pre-requisite for goodness. And often, atrocities have been committed in the name of God. Religion and goodness do not necessarily correlate. Other factors supersede belonging to or even practicing a faith. This, from Marcus Aurelius, seems to cover it all:
Im wondering if the CC has an opinion on this? Ive wondered about this many times before as well, as I know plenty of very good people, but they are not religious. I think we really need to know if truly good people are sent to eternal suffering and torment SOLELY because they did not worship God.People are not saved because they are good. Everyone is good to an extent, but no one is good absolutely as God is good, whether they are Christians or whether they are atheists. We do not merit salvation but have to ask for forgiveness.
That said, Catholics also do not pronounce on the subjective culpability of unbelievers. We do not know where Gandhi is. We do not know where good-hearted atheists are.