S
slywakka250
Guest
I have heard that heaven and hell each have different “levels.” The Blessed Mother and the greatest saints surely will have a different experience of God in heaven than will someone who just barely made it into heaven.
Likewise, I would imagine there are different “levels” of hell, in which each is punished according to the gravity of the sins commited, and the degree of the rejection of God, that person in hell has performed with his free will.
Now let’s take the lowest place in heaven, and the highest place in hell, and place them next to each other, and compare the state of the man in each.
What will the difference be between these two? my current understanding is that the one in heaven will experience the beatific vision in absolute blissful eternity, while the one in hell will experience eternal separation from God in absolute terror and despair. That the man in heaven is happy seems to follow from the definition of being in heaven, despite the fact that he is at the lowest level of heaven, having just barely made it in. Likewise, it follows from the definition of being in hell that the man there is supremely sad and suffering, despite being at the highest level of hell.
Now if we looked at these two men in their earthly lives, how different would they be? Surely there must be a dramatic difference between them, given that one will experience heaven and the other hell, unless it is the case that the lowest level in heaven and the highest level in hell are not really that different from each other, but this really contradicts the whole purpose of calling heaven, heaven, and hell, hell, so that seems unlikely.
So these two people stand on either side of God’s balance, separated by the smallest degree possible. perhaps one of them commited the most grave venial sin possible, whereas the other commited the least grave mortal sin.
I’m trying to think of an example to illustrate this, but I don’t think I could come up with an adequate one because we don’t know precisely what gravely sinful action coupled with a specific intention and full knowledge, will actually land someone in hell, because God takes everything into account when making his judgement, and we do not know exactly how he judges, because the Church has given us no examples of people who actually go to hell. While we are given saints which gives us one side of the equation, the fact that the church declares no one in hell, gives us no light onto what sort of person might go there. We only have the moral law as a useful guide, but so much relies on faith and trust in God. we are unable to give a complete account of a person who for sure goes to hell, because we cannot comprehend the fullness of God’s mercy, and we cannot make a judgement in anyway whatsoever, not even with a hypothetical person, I will argue, because we don’t’ know the odds!!
Let us just take stealing as an example though, because I have heard that stealing can be both a venial and a mortal sin, depending on circumstances. Let’s say the primary circumstance driving the gravity of the sin is the amount stolen. To me it seems, God must draw the line somewhere, all things being equal at a specific dollar amount. In which case we may have our example above, in which one man goes to eternal bliss, and the man who takes one more dollar to eternal destruction.
To me this situation is absurd, and this maybe a bad example, but the general argument I’m making is simply the observation that it seems very strange that God should draw a strict line in the sand between pure bliss in heaven, and pure suffering in hell, and not show us precisely where this line is. Furthermore, that two people could be on either side but, very close to the line but nonetheless experience infinitly differing results (heaven vs hell) ($999 vs $1000 stolen), is madness to me, and an argument against the existence of a true hell.
Look at some of my other posts, and you can see that I’m really struggling with this topic.
how could a just God draw a line between heaven and hell the way he does? it’s too black and white!
Likewise, I would imagine there are different “levels” of hell, in which each is punished according to the gravity of the sins commited, and the degree of the rejection of God, that person in hell has performed with his free will.
Now let’s take the lowest place in heaven, and the highest place in hell, and place them next to each other, and compare the state of the man in each.
What will the difference be between these two? my current understanding is that the one in heaven will experience the beatific vision in absolute blissful eternity, while the one in hell will experience eternal separation from God in absolute terror and despair. That the man in heaven is happy seems to follow from the definition of being in heaven, despite the fact that he is at the lowest level of heaven, having just barely made it in. Likewise, it follows from the definition of being in hell that the man there is supremely sad and suffering, despite being at the highest level of hell.
Now if we looked at these two men in their earthly lives, how different would they be? Surely there must be a dramatic difference between them, given that one will experience heaven and the other hell, unless it is the case that the lowest level in heaven and the highest level in hell are not really that different from each other, but this really contradicts the whole purpose of calling heaven, heaven, and hell, hell, so that seems unlikely.
So these two people stand on either side of God’s balance, separated by the smallest degree possible. perhaps one of them commited the most grave venial sin possible, whereas the other commited the least grave mortal sin.
I’m trying to think of an example to illustrate this, but I don’t think I could come up with an adequate one because we don’t know precisely what gravely sinful action coupled with a specific intention and full knowledge, will actually land someone in hell, because God takes everything into account when making his judgement, and we do not know exactly how he judges, because the Church has given us no examples of people who actually go to hell. While we are given saints which gives us one side of the equation, the fact that the church declares no one in hell, gives us no light onto what sort of person might go there. We only have the moral law as a useful guide, but so much relies on faith and trust in God. we are unable to give a complete account of a person who for sure goes to hell, because we cannot comprehend the fullness of God’s mercy, and we cannot make a judgement in anyway whatsoever, not even with a hypothetical person, I will argue, because we don’t’ know the odds!!
Let us just take stealing as an example though, because I have heard that stealing can be both a venial and a mortal sin, depending on circumstances. Let’s say the primary circumstance driving the gravity of the sin is the amount stolen. To me it seems, God must draw the line somewhere, all things being equal at a specific dollar amount. In which case we may have our example above, in which one man goes to eternal bliss, and the man who takes one more dollar to eternal destruction.
To me this situation is absurd, and this maybe a bad example, but the general argument I’m making is simply the observation that it seems very strange that God should draw a strict line in the sand between pure bliss in heaven, and pure suffering in hell, and not show us precisely where this line is. Furthermore, that two people could be on either side but, very close to the line but nonetheless experience infinitly differing results (heaven vs hell) ($999 vs $1000 stolen), is madness to me, and an argument against the existence of a true hell.
Look at some of my other posts, and you can see that I’m really struggling with this topic.
how could a just God draw a line between heaven and hell the way he does? it’s too black and white!