Hell

[jrabs]

AnAtheist:

Do you really have the freedom to choose B, when God knew a billions years ago, you are going to choose A?

yes. You have the choice. Just because God knew does not mean that he is not dissappointed in our decision and did not try to convince us otherwise before we made that choice.

 

[FelixBlue]

martino:

I just want to remind you that heresy (the formal denial of Church doctrine, i.e. hell) does not lend itself to solving the problem that you indicate (indifference), in fact it only makes matters worse, because anyone that is gullilbe enough to believe you when you say, “there is no hell”, is even more likely to become indifferent to salvation. Wouldnt you agree with this?

Thanks for the reply. But here is the question. Is there any issue that would justify or compel one to deny the authority of the Church.

Let me give my personal scenario in brief:

I became Christian (evangelical protestant) because my parents were Christian (my father was a mininster…though he, too, has now converted). I became a Catholic (at age 21) when I began to have doubts about the Protestant Church. Thus, in effect, I rejected the “authority” of my protestant church (small c) due to what I believed was true (that the Catholic Church was the one true Church seen via tradition, scripture and history and that the authority of the Church was binding). I have been Catholic for 12 years. And although I have had this question regarding hell for those 12 years (in fact going back to my protestant days), I have never let it seriously cause me to question the authority of the Church. I have always done the necessary mental gymnastics to fit in…following largely, the argument of von Balthasar in his Dare We Hope that All Men Be Saved which argues that we can hopethat all are saved but that we must not despair of anyone’s salvation on the one hand or presume anyone’s salvation on the other. Now I feel I must presume. Now I doubt this doctrine to the point where I believe I must say I reject the doctrine. So where do I go? What do I do?

I see two possibilities:

One, turn into a fuzzy liberal Catholic. But this is an impossibility as, to me, liberal Catholicism is intellectually dishonest (it holds to a tradition without holding to it)

Two, leave the Church altogether and find myself floating alone in a huge sea of questions and uncertainties. Not a very attractive option either.

I want to stay in the Church.

But what I’m hearing from folks is that hell is just something you have to accept on faith…on the teaching of the Church…don’t think about it. Is that the best we can do?

 

[The_Augustinian]

If God’s grace is irresistable, and God wishes for the salvation of all, and one is saved through God’s grace, it would follow that all will be saved.

**However, **God’s grace is not irresistable. Man rejects the grace of God all the time when he sins. And if he dies impenitent, he rejects God’s grace in toto, therefore being forever separated from God.

Theologically yours,

The Augustinian

P.S. If you cannot accept the existence of Hell, FelixBlue, you reject not only the authority of the Church, but of Sacred Scripture and orthodoxy in any wide sense. Be careful.

 

[Fidelis]

FelixBlue:

First, the idea of an eternal heaven does not logically require the idea of an eternal hell.

I’m not from Missouri, but you’ll have to show me why it doesn’t. We can ask questions, too.

Secondly, I tend not to look at heaven as a place of reward, but as the reality where God is taking all of creation. But I don’t want to get into that…as it is another issue.

This is an issue of your own construct. There is no argument against personal pet theological theories, since, by definition, there is no criteria, not even logic, to evaluate it. As an aside, if even your perception of the very *nature * of heaven and hell is not one that others can find common ground, this seriously impedes the entire conversation. If I’m giving someone directions, but their concept of what north, south, east and west differs from mine, I’m wasting my breath.

Regarding the authority issue, you’ll simply have to accept that for a long time I was a solid, orthodox, Catholic. When I was in college, I co-founded an apologetics organization defending the faith (at a huge secular college). I understand the issue of authority. And I do not wish to revert to Protestantism of any flavor. You are right, though. I deeply fear trusting in myself. I don’t want to reject the Church’s teaching on hell, but find that I may have no alternative.

I think you may have hit on something here. You may *understand * the issue of authority, but it is clear you have not come to grips with it or come to peace with it’s implications, one way or the other. I reiterate that you will have to do this first before you can come to terms with, or even discuss, any given theological issue.

 

[GuibertOfNogent]

FelixBlue:

But what I’m hearing from folks is that hell is just something you have to accept on faith…on the teaching of the Church…don’t think about it. Is that the best we can do?

Exactly. I’m going through a big period of doubt and transition myself. The “problem of evil” has always been a huge issue of doubt for me. It would be wonderful if we could all just accept on faith whatever we are told.

However, this is the APOLOGETICS forum. Let’s have more apologetics! Maybe we should create the “fide” forum where the answer to every question is “have faith.” There have been some really good answers here, but is there more? If a non-Catholic was asking this question, you couldn’t simply say “have faith.”

 

[Pbuschur]

I agree with Augustian’s post above. It is the slow constant pressure of example and well timed encouragement, as well as prayer, which has the best chance of engaging the spirit. To think we will save anyone is presumptuous, we can only encourage, they must save themselves.

I want to yell and scream, but I think this is not the most affective way. We would then just be titled “Freaks”.

 

[The_Augustinian]

Summing up the discussion so far, let me analyze FelixBlue’s position:

FelixBlue apparently believes in some sort of punishment for the wicked after death, but because of the temporal and finite nature of their sins, the grace of God will cause them to repent in Hell, turn to God, and go to Heaven. This is the position of Origen.

Now, there are two courses of argument to refute this position. The first is to prove that the will of man is set at death, and he cannot repent in Hell. This is shown from Hebrews: “It is appointed once for man to die, and after this, the Judgement.” I’m sure there are some other fancy theological arguments, but I don’t have the time to go over them.

The second course is easier: showing FelixBlue the inconsistency of his position. FelixBlue rejects authority (the Church, Scripture) in order to uphold his universalist belief. However, he upholds his universalist belief based upon the supposed grace of God. How do we know of God’s grace, especially grace through Christ? From the Scriptures and the Church, which FelixBlue rejected. The grace of God and Hell are both articles of faith, articles we accept on the basis of the authority of Divine Revelation, not reason. FelixBlue cannot pick and choose what parts of Divine Revelation to accept. He must accept all, or reject all, or else prove that Hell is not a part of the deposit of faith.

That is all I have to contribute. My arguments are not fully developed. Please extend them as you wish.

God bless,

The Augustinian

 

[FelixBlue]

GuibertOfNogent:

Exactly. I’m going through a big period of doubt and transition myself. The “problem of evil” has always been a huge issue of doubt for me. It would be wonderful if we could all just accept on faith whatever we are told.

However, this is the APOLOGETICS forum. Let’s have more apologetics! Maybe we should create the “fide” forum where the answer to every question is “have faith.” There have been some really good answers here, but is there more? If a non-Catholic was asking this question, you couldn’t simply say “have faith.”

I can’t agree more. While I agree with others that “authority” can be a subject for apologetics, authority should not be the only answer for other questions.

By the way, your question on evil is partly why I doubt the doctrine of hell. If you take away hell, evil is much easier to swallow. One can see from life that growth and change oftentimes require pain. In like manner, one can see how creation and that movement toward full relationship with God, full participation in the divine nature, in some sense, require evil (I know I’m going to be lambasted for that statement). But how is hell, an eternal condition, possibly justified?

 

[Apologia100]

FelixBlue:

I can’t agree more. While I agree with others that “authority” can be a subject for apologetics, authority should not be the only answer for other questions.

By the way, your question on evil is partly why I doubt the doctrine of hell. If you take away hell, evil is much easier to swallow. One can see from life that growth and change oftentimes require pain. In like manner, one can see how creation and that movement toward full relationship with God, full participation in the divine nature, in some sense, require evil (I know I’m going to be lambasted for that statement). But how is hell, an eternal condition, possibly justified?

Magisterial authority is one of the basis by which Catholics define their theology, so it is a perfect way to answer. The only other way is to answer from the naturalist or the “sola scriptura” perspectives, which the Church rejects. If you don’t want a Catholic answer that refers to the authority of the church, you have to go outside the church, and then you basically just pick the theological perspective that you like. Forget Objective, Ultimate Truth, just go with whatever feels good.

 

[Mijoy2]

GuibertOfNogent:

Exactly. I’m going through a big period of doubt and transition myself. The “problem of evil” has always been a huge issue of doubt for me. It would be wonderful if we could all just accept on faith whatever we are told.

However, this is the APOLOGETICS forum. Let’s have more apologetics! Maybe we should create the “fide” forum where the answer to every question is “have faith.” There have been some really good answers here, but is there more? If a non-Catholic was asking this question, you couldn’t simply say “have faith.”

Doesn’t the premise of the original question imply one of two things? :

1. The Church is flawed or,
2. There is an injustice going in here and God is behind it all.

If I am correct, nowhere does the Church say that we are to assume any particular individual is in Hell. (Judas, Hitler, Jack-the-ripper, that neighbor who stuck your head in the toilet when you were a kid…)

The Church does not require that we believe there is any one thing that will assuradly destine us to Hell. The Church says there is a Hell. The Church says sin seperates us from God and leaves our souls in danger. The Church says God will judge us perfectly. The Church says God has infinate mercy.

As Catholics we believe there is a Hell. We are on our own in guessing what percentage of us will end up there. I think we are going to be pleasantly surprised. I’ve heard vastly differing opinions on this from respected theologens which lends more evidence to the fact that we simply do not know!

Just my opinion. I do not think the Church prohibits me from feeling this way. Anyone see it otherwise, I’m open to listening.

 

[Glutamine]

Do you believe in the Marian apparition at Fatima. There she revealed to Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco a vision of Hell. I’m sure you can read more about that.

 

[FelixBlue]

The Augustinian:

Summing up the discussion so far, let me analyze FelixBlue’s position:

FelixBlue apparently believes in some sort of punishment for the wicked after death, but because of the temporal and finite nature of their sins, the grace of God will cause them to repent in Hell, turn to God, and go to Heaven. This is the position of Origen.

Now, there are two courses of argument to refute this position. The first is to prove that the will of man is set at death, and he cannot repent in Hell. This is shown from Hebrews: “It is appointed once for man to die, and after this, the Judgement.” I’m sure there are some other fancy theological arguments, but I don’t have the time to go over them.

The second course is easier: showing FelixBlue the inconsistency of his position. FelixBlue rejects authority (the Church, Scripture) in order to uphold his universalist belief. However, he upholds his universalist belief based upon the supposed grace of God. How do we know of God’s grace, especially grace through Christ? From the Scriptures and the Church, which FelixBlue rejected. The grace of God and Hell are both articles of faith, articles we accept on the basis of the authority of Divine Revelation, not reason. FelixBlue cannot pick and choose what parts of Divine Revelation to accept. He must accept all, or reject all, or else prove that Hell is not a part of the deposit of faith.

That is all I have to contribute. My arguments are not fully developed. Please extend them as you wish.

God bless,

The Augustinian

You are right. It is Origen (and other early Fathers). But I would like to, if possible, leave my other theological leanings aside. I do this because it seems impossible for me to defend, in this forum, my theological leanings. Assume that I am orthodox but for this one issue of hell.

You are also right regarding your second point. I am involved in tremendous contradictions! My source of faith and knowledge of that faith has been the scriptures, tradition, and the Magisterium. But this is precisely the pickle in which I find myself: I want to be intellectually honest and consistent but find I cannot (for what I perceive to be logical or empirical reasons) accept the doctrine of hell.

Thus, I’m trying to dig myself out of the hole.

By the way, regarding the Hebrews passage, could there not be other interpretations? Afterall, what does judgment mean here? For the righteous, clearly it is not a condemnation. Again, my argument is that there will be punishment (corrective, reconciling).

At anyrate, Scripture seems to contradict itself on the issue of hell. Some sriptures indicate that only few will be saved; at other times it clearly indicates that all will be saved (Read Romans 5 for example).

 

[FelixBlue]

Apologia100:

just go with whatever feels good.

Again you imply that those who have sincere, serious questions are simply going by feelings. Is this true?

 

[FelixBlue]

Mijoy2:

Doesn’t the premise of the original question imply one of two things? :

1. The Church is flawed or,
2. There is an injustice going in here and God is behind it all.

If I am correct, nowhere does the Church say that we are to assume any particular individual is in Hell. (Judas, Hitler, Jack-the-ripper, that neighbor who stuck your head in the toilet when you were a kid…)

The Church does not require that we believe there is any one thing that will assuradly destine us to Hell. The Church says there is a Hell. The Church says sin seperates us from God and leaves our souls in danger. The Church says God will judge us perfectly. The Church says God has infinate mercy.

As Catholics we believe there is a Hell. We are on our own in guessing what percentage of us will end up there. I think we are going to be pleasantly surprised. I’ve heard vastly differing opinions on this from respected theologens which lends more evidence to the fact that we simply do not know!

Just my opinion. I do not think the Church prohibits me from feeling this way. Anyone see it otherwise, I’m open to listening.

But that is just it. There are varying opinions within the Church on this issue. Both historically and now. The position you have taken, though, is a fairly new one developed largely over the 20th century. It is the one espoused by Hans Urs von Balthasar in his Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved. It is also found in the German Catechism put out in the late 80s(?).

The problem is that historically, in the west, theologians have taken a much harsher view on hell: that it is not only real, but that people are actually there…or will be there. Plus, we have the visions, as mentioned in one of the replies above, of the tortures of hell.

If I am going to take the more hopeful view that all will be saved, I have to somehow deal with the theological tradition of the Church and the above visions.

Between the lines, I understand you to hope that all will be saved. But is that enough? Can I believe in a God who allows others to even possibly reject him for all eternity?

 

[FelixBlue]

Glutamine:

Do you believe in the Marian apparition at Fatima. There she revealed to Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco a vision of Hell. I’m sure you can read more about that.

I don’t know. I used to…

 

[fix]

GuibertOfNogent:

I don’t think FelixBlue is asking why people lost in sin don’t act as if there is a hell. He is asking why Bishops, Priests, you, and I live our normal, daily lives as if we weren’t surrounded by people who are headed for an ETERNITY of misery.

Felix is implying that if we really believed it, we wouldn’t be tip-toeing around trying not to offend anyone, but instead, we’d be desperately pleading with every person we encountered. How can we look someone in the eye that is most likely heading for an eternity in hell and say nothing?

I’m not sure it’s a valid argument against the existence of hell, but it’s certainly a challenge to all Christians.

Yep, sorry I misunderstood the question. It seems self evident. People do not talk about it because most believe in eternal salvation, or only murderers go to hell. People, also, do not talk about because they are overly influenced with secular culture. It is not polite or PC to mention someone is immersed in sin.

 

[The_Augustinian]

Peace be with you.

This will be the last, last posting for tonight. It’s already 2 am, and I need sleep.

FelixBlue, it’s clear that you have many concerns about your faith than just Hell. It’s also clear that you’re well-versed in theology. I offer one final insight: God respects human dignity. He allows men to reject Him. After all, didn’t He allow them to reject His Son? God, the Eternal Lover, offers his Love to us, His creation. The fact that we ignore and trample on His Eternal Love is not His fault. To be cliched: God does not send anyone to Hell, we send ourselves.

I will be praying for you.

In Christ,

The Augustinian

 

[fix]

von Balthasar in his Dare We Hope that All Men Be Saved which argues that we can hopethat all are saved but that we must not despair of anyone’s salvation on the one hand or presume anyone’s salvation on the other. Now I feel I must presume.

Do you doubt the existence of hell, or that any human soul can go there? Because if you accept the Gospel, then you accept hell exists, unless you reject what Christ says?

Whether a human soul is there has only recently been doubted. You mention von Balthasar. I know JPII has mentioned him and Avery Dulles has mentioned him, but my understanding is that his novel idea is just that, his own novel idea.

This site has a tract by Jimmy Akin about this topic. He is on the money as usual.

 

[martino]

FelixBlue:

I see two possibilities:

One, turn into a fuzzy liberal Catholic. But this is an impossibility as, to me, liberal Catholicism is intellectually dishonest (it holds to a tradition without holding to it)

Two, leave the Church altogether and find myself floating alone in a huge sea of questions and uncertainties. Not a very attractive option either.

I want to stay in the Church.

But what I’m hearing from folks is that hell is just something you have to accept on faith…on the teaching of the Church…don’t think about it. Is that the best we can do?

My answer would not be to “not think about it”, because it is too important an issue. It is ok to have questions regarding Church doctrine as long as we dont deny the doctrine. So I would continue the questioning, read more of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church regarding hell. Most of all, pray for grace because none of us could have faith at all with out grace.

Scrutinize the disbelief of hell just as harshly as you would the belief in it. What are the logical implications if hell didnt exist? Number one that would mean that the Church is not infallible, which means that all the doctrines are subject to error, which in turn means we really have no confidence in our faith at all. If the Church has no authority in matters of faith then we dont even know for sure if we have the correct Scriptures in the Bible. Everything becomes total chaos and absolute truth is lost. You believe in purgatory and heaven, but why? We learn of their existence from the same source we learn of hell. Is the source reliable or not? To deny hell raises many more questions that the belief in hell does, unless you are prepared to become an atheist and just deny everything, but even then you have to know everything that does exist before you can say what doesnt. I will pray for you!!

 

[tom.wineman]

I believe in Jesus and he believed in Hell. That’s good enough for me. Your beliefs seemed to have started in the wrong place.