B
bisco
Guest
well said! and if you deny His teaching, what kind of a relationship is that?
If God loves everyone, why would he send some of those he loves to hell for eternity?
- Status
U
Usagi
Guest
Indeed, Scripture tells us that the very reason Jesus has taken so long to return is that God is holding out to save the largest number of souls possible. Remember, God knows who will choose Him in the end, and how long it will take, and what it will take on His part to make it happen. Nobody dies a week before he would have repented and goes to hell forever on a technicality. God wants us all in Heaven and is constantly helping us get there, not waiting to say “gotcha” after an accident of timing damns a soul that would have gone to Heaven if only given a bit more time.
Usagi
K
Kurisu35712
Guest
I actually have indeed had the thought that the main reason the world hasn’t ended yet is nothing more than the fact that not every soul meant to be in Heaven has been born yet. God won’t end the world until the last human being He intends to create has been able to make that choice.
A
amrin
Guest
Love is free, when you love someone you love them freely, you can’t make someone love you. The same way, a loving God can’t make people love him else it wouldn’t be a free choice. People choose to either love or not love God, each choice has a consequence.
I’ve read somewhere that if you deny God in life, then when you die you are separated from God. That separation is what is known as “Hell” usually that Hell is considered an everlasting pit of fire because it was meant to make people understand that it pains you to know you will never be in God’s presence. That pain however is not physical, but spiritual. Hell is the state of hopelessness of knowing God is real and that you carry to eternity your sins and rejection of God.
I’ve read somewhere that if you deny God in life, then when you die you are separated from God. That separation is what is known as “Hell” usually that Hell is considered an everlasting pit of fire because it was meant to make people understand that it pains you to know you will never be in God’s presence. That pain however is not physical, but spiritual. Hell is the state of hopelessness of knowing God is real and that you carry to eternity your sins and rejection of God.
S
sudy
Guest
I’ve always understood it to be a choice, too.
Now if the question was why would anyone choose hell, I’ve absolutely no idea.
A
amrin
Guest
I have a small idea… I once asked a friend (a very liberal atheist) the following question: “If God appeared to everyone at the same time in the whole world, and it was recorded by tv etc, and there would be no doubt at all it was God and not an elaborated hoax, and God said the Roman Catholic Church was His Church would you convert to Christianity and praise God? Since He would be giving you assurance that He really does exist and Heaven exists?”
The answer he gave me was “No, I would never bow down to any god even if he created me and I go to Hell. My life is my own and I do with it whatever I want and that doesn’t include going to a church on sunday”
So yes some people choose hell because they’re too egocentric and too proud to be accounted by anyone, even by the Almighty God.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
One where you assume God is wrong and the individual is right, imagine that rather awkward situation as a result of denial.
Better to say I don’t know instead of I don’t believe.
B
bisco
Guest
choosing hell seems too simplistic to me. i think most people would choose heaven if it were just a simple choice. but it’s not simple, and it’s not easy. picking up your cross daily, and living for Jesus, take determination and willpower, and can only be done with the strength of the Holy Spirit. this requires a lot of prayer, mass attendance and the sacraments. i fear that too many think it is a simple choice and will be in for a very sad surprise. ‘when did we see you thirsty, and not give you something to drink’?
S
sudy
Guest
I think, bisco, that you and I agree 
my idea of ‘choosing’ heaven wasn’t meant to imply that we just make a random choice, to choose it over hell… I meant choosing God and choosing to do His will.
my idea of ‘choosing’ heaven wasn’t meant to imply that we just make a random choice, to choose it over hell… I meant choosing God and choosing to do His will.
B
bisco
Guest
agreed, and wasn’t responding to your post, but i have read some that make it seem like, ‘i’ll just choose hell, i don’t want anything to do with God’. and that isn’t what i sense, when i talk to atheists and the like. if someone simply doesn’t believe, it doesn’t really equate to ‘choosing hell’.
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Connected to this is the existence of the seraphim. These Angels are the ones closest to God and because they are the closest, they burn from the Fire of God’s love, hence the name “burning ones”.
G
guiltyofdoubt
Guest
God is called our Father, no? This is what I struggle with logically.
As a father myself, no matter WHAT my child would do, even if he were to reject me, I would still love him, and never condemn him. And I am not pure Love, like God is.
This is why I find the idea of Hell so repugnant. God is capable of cancelling our “choice”, because He is God and can do anything. Especially you would think for sins that may be considered “minor” compared to killing somebody, just for an example. Yet all sins are treated equally and all condemn one eternally if your timing isn’t just right where you can receive the sacraments right at the end.
We are weak. I am very weak. To me, there is probably a far better chance that I will die in sin - probably mortal sin - than not. This scares me beyond belief, yet looking at an examination of conscience, I know I can tick box after box of mortally sinful behavior.
I really feel hopeless and helpless in this regard.
As a father myself, no matter WHAT my child would do, even if he were to reject me, I would still love him, and never condemn him. And I am not pure Love, like God is.
This is why I find the idea of Hell so repugnant. God is capable of cancelling our “choice”, because He is God and can do anything. Especially you would think for sins that may be considered “minor” compared to killing somebody, just for an example. Yet all sins are treated equally and all condemn one eternally if your timing isn’t just right where you can receive the sacraments right at the end.
We are weak. I am very weak. To me, there is probably a far better chance that I will die in sin - probably mortal sin - than not. This scares me beyond belief, yet looking at an examination of conscience, I know I can tick box after box of mortally sinful behavior.
I really feel hopeless and helpless in this regard.
B
bisco
Guest
this is the point where you need to put your trust in God. it is not perfect people who go to heaven, no one is perfect. it is those who put their trust in God. go to mass, avail yourself of the sacraments, pick up your cross daily and do good to others, neglecting your own desires. pray everyday, sincerely asking God for His grace and mercy. even if you sin mortally, since your last confession, if you confess it to Him and repent of it, He will forgive you. He is a God of love, mercy and justice. ‘Lord have mercy on me, a sinner’. and the publican went home, more justified than the pharisee, who didn’t think he needed forgiveness. (and probably didn’t get any)
J
JMartyr73340
Guest
Correct me if I am wrong, but this article by Father Chris Pietraszko seems to suggest that one can end up in Hell, even if one has a strong faith commitment to God, and doesn’t want to go there.
I mean, we still choose it. God doesn’t send us there personally. But we need to be careful that we are not unintentionally suggesting that we are saved by “faith alone” or “a sincere commitment to God” that is not really lived out.
diocesanspirituality.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/priests-are-still-promoting-contraception/
Priests are still promoting contraception
by Father Chris Pietraszko
"Therefore, son of man, say to your people, ‘If someone who is righteous disobeys, that person’s former righteousness will count for nothing. And if someone who is wicked repents, that person’s former wickedness will not bring condemnation. The righteous person who sins will not be allowed to live even though they were formerly righteous. If I tell a righteous person that they will surely live, but then they trust in their righteousness and do evil, none of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered; they will die for the evil they have done.’”
[Ez 33:12-13]
Fr. Robert Barron stated in one of his videos that moral-legalism is not only bound to conservative trends but also liberal trends. Meaning that both the liberal and the conservative (if I may use such categories), can both hold to a moral code, without ever internalizing the spirituality of that moral code.
Recently I encountered a priest who held to this very type of moral outlook when he spoke on the issue of contraception with regard to a family that regularly practiced NFP.
First, it must be simply noted that the speaker did not take into account the Church’s teaching which clearly defines the usage of contraceptives as “intrinsically evil.” Thereby prohibiting its usage in any circumstance, concluding that as a moral object, contraception cannot every be justified by a good-intention or a complicated circumstance.
Second, in suggesting that this family had practiced NFP their whole life, thereby implying there was an “over-all” spiritual docility to the Church and the moral law, assumes a morally legalistic approach. St. John Paul II condemned this moral ideology, normally called the “fundamental-option” whereby a person’s overall commitment to God and his law diminishes any moral culpability when looking at mortal and grave matter (c.f. “Splendor of Truth” paragraphs 65-70).
Morality has a spirit to it, and is not concerned with the number of times one is faithful as much as avoiding any occasion where we offend our neighbour, ourselves, and God. To avoid offending another is most importantly born out of a love for the other and self and God.
To suggest that a couple practiced their faith well, means that they loved their neighbour as themselves, and loved God. Thus, to give an exception to this practice would likewise be to suggest that they would be permitted to hate God, hate themselves, and hate their neighbour in a given particular circumstance.
This of course was not explicitly stated, but would nonetheless be the logical consequences of what is suggested. I blame such a view on the lack of “internalizing” the moral law itself. Below is some reflection on why any particular act (despite an over-all goodness) is nonetheless a gravely immoral act. I realize many people at this point might roll their eyes, but I take this issue quite seriously, and I think others should.
B
bisco
Guest
i believe we are saved by ‘faith alone’. so that 'none can claim to have earned their salvation. it is a gratuitous gift from God. but, ‘faith without works is dead’.
W
WildCatholic
Guest
What I struggle with is how anyone could openly reject God. Sure there are atheists and satanists and those of other religions who believe God is false, but the thing is that if God were to announce he was coming back, most people would probably defecate themselves and get to church and pray profusely and we’d have mile long confession lines.
Now are most of these people sincere? Probably not. I think the attitude of most of the general populace is that everyone wants to get to heaven but not a lot want to go now. Unfortunately God will not announce this coming this way so most of these people that are living lives of sin but are nominal christians won’t have a chance to repent but have they really rejected God? Nobody except for satanists want to go to hell and atheists don’t believe in an afterlife so in their rejection we can say that it is unlikely atheists will be in heaven. Most people want the goods but don’t want to live the life. To me this doesn’t amount to rejection. Granted I wonder if maybe God will say at the end of time “why did you wait?” Sadly I think most people think that they will have a deathbed conversion or be okay as long as they get some sort of peace just before death.
So overall I guess I feel like few people truly reject God, but being human we don’t do enough to follow him and rather are absorbed in our own lives and most of us are to the point that we won’t truly give God due until its to late.
Now are most of these people sincere? Probably not. I think the attitude of most of the general populace is that everyone wants to get to heaven but not a lot want to go now. Unfortunately God will not announce this coming this way so most of these people that are living lives of sin but are nominal christians won’t have a chance to repent but have they really rejected God? Nobody except for satanists want to go to hell and atheists don’t believe in an afterlife so in their rejection we can say that it is unlikely atheists will be in heaven. Most people want the goods but don’t want to live the life. To me this doesn’t amount to rejection. Granted I wonder if maybe God will say at the end of time “why did you wait?” Sadly I think most people think that they will have a deathbed conversion or be okay as long as they get some sort of peace just before death.
So overall I guess I feel like few people truly reject God, but being human we don’t do enough to follow him and rather are absorbed in our own lives and most of us are to the point that we won’t truly give God due until its to late.
A
AndyF
Guest
'Rather than a place, hell indicates the state of those who freely and definitively separate themselves from God, the source of all life and joy".
Those?
So why don’t ‘those’ nations who by their request to God to form singular entities, to act in that form, who have the advantages of millions of consciences to aid in getting it right, to wish to be judged and recognized in that form, by their collective evil acts, never receive collective damnation in that form?.
If the Church can go only so far, and it indeed wants to do a good thing, I think the situation warrants a global dispensation for all individuals while the nations of this world with impunity try to surpass in evil every definition of murder and offense to God.
Those?
So why don’t ‘those’ nations who by their request to God to form singular entities, to act in that form, who have the advantages of millions of consciences to aid in getting it right, to wish to be judged and recognized in that form, by their collective evil acts, never receive collective damnation in that form?.
If the Church can go only so far, and it indeed wants to do a good thing, I think the situation warrants a global dispensation for all individuals while the nations of this world with impunity try to surpass in evil every definition of murder and offense to God.
B
bisco
Guest
when we talk about rejecting God, i don’t think it has to be an outright rejection. after all, before the flood, 'they were all ‘eating and drinking, marrying, and giving away in marriage’. but their thoughts were not of God, their lives were not centered on God, their actions, were not in response to the love of God.
N
NeuralMonk
Guest
Salvation is not a point in time thing, or else Paul would not have stated in Philippians 2:12 “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always OBEYED–not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence–continue to WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling,”
You cannot continue to do something that is point in time. If there are no works, is it passive obedience? Sola fide is not found in the scriptures (nor are the other 5 sola’s for that mater).
Soteriology (study of salvation) defines Christian salvation as composed of three distinct parts: Justification, Sanctification and Glorification.
Justification according to Paul is “Grace through faith.” It is not sola fide nor sola gratis but gratis per fidem. Faith is required in the works of Jesus Christ, which provides grace to enter into a relationship with him. Eph 2:8 (which is the verse in question here) is the one where Luther added the word “alone” to the end of faith. This is not in the Greek or Latin. He also assumed the “καὶ τοῦτο” (and this) to apply to faith, but the structure of the verse does not indicate faith as the object. Faith in this verse is the method, not the object. Grace is the gift of God in this verse and it is grace which maintains us just before God. Romans 5:1-2 clarifies this, “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand.”
Justification puts us at peace with God. It is faith that starts that process, but it is the grace of God where we maintain that justification. When we do things to interrupt that grace, we stand outside the justification of God. It is not works, but relationship. Grace gives us the ability to stand (which IS a work) in the full justification of God through Jesus Christ. Jesus pointed this out when he said, “Be gone from me, I never KNEW you.” The knowledge is that same concept of an intimate friend. It is relationship. If I keep hitting you in the head with a 2x4 every day, how long can I call you friend? Thanks be to God, he has the eternal capacity for forgiveness if I confess my sins. If I confess, he is faithFULL and JUST to forgive me (1 John 1:9).
For Catholics, justification starts at baptism and continues till confirmation and first communion. Confirmation a confirming of faith within an individual (Article 2 of the CATECHISM) which is sealed by the first communion. Baptism cleans the soul of original sin, confirmation is the declaration of faith and Eucharist is the entering of God into union with humanity.
Sanctification is the process of holiness. It is the being made perfect according to His will. Hebrews 10:14. Holiness is what we are called to do. It is in this practice of holiness that most non-Catholics accuse us of “works based salvation.” Sanctification is getting ready for the our final abode. It is cleansing ourselves for the life to come.
Glorification is when we reach that holy state, and God gives us the glory. 1 Cor 15:42-44 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in GLORY; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
Justification allows us to practice sanctification which leads to glorification. It is evidence based “salvation” which even Luther professed.
- Status