Is eternal suffering pointless?

[Good_Fella]

We don’t need to be absolutely perfectly righteous like God in order to be “morally upright.” No one can be righteous like God, of course, because we are imperfect and limited creatures!

We need to strive for perfection in our interior life, which we can’t do without the help of God’s grace. It isn’t enough just to live a morally upright life by observing the letter of the law in fear of God. If we hope to be with God, we must live a divine life. This requires the infusion of the supernatural virtues into our souls and the fabric of our being. God ultimately judges us by our interior states, not by our external acts.

However, that does not mean that people who are mostly good deserve endless punishment, are born spiritually dead, and incapable of doing any good without miraculous divine intervention.

God’s intervening actual grace is providential and involves human cooperation. Adam and Eve fell from God’s grace by choosing to reject God’s providential reign. If we are spiritually dead it’s because of our pride - putting ourselves before God while failing to put our trust in Him, which we are naturally inclined to do collectively.

Noah, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Enoch (Cain’s son!), and Job (among many more) are specifically considered to be “morally upright” by God himself according to the Tanakh. Similarly, David was a “man after God’s own heart” though he committed many grievous sins. Moses too sinned grievously, and yet was considered righteous by God.

But because of original sin, there was no one who was righteous and had never sinned. There is not one living soul who can honestly stand before God and declare to Him that they are righteous. Only God can make that declaration to man. For this reason only Christ could merit the initial grace of justification and forgiveness and reconcile the whole world with God. The gates of Heaven were closed to all the righteous of the OT until our Lord and Saviour restored the equality of justice between God and mankind.

God forbade Moses to enter the promised land because he failed to trust Him and put his faith in himself, not withstanding how morally upright he had been. The promised land is a metaphor for Heaven. Moses’ exclusion represents Adam’s expulsion from paradise for the very same reason. The original sin of pride has alienated the entire human race from God.

***If I justify myself, my own mouth will condemn me. If I say I’m perfect, it will prove me perverse.
Job 9, 20

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity;
And in sin did my mother conceive me.
Psalm 51, 5***

Sin must be avoided and shunned, but it is also important to make amends and repent. We cannot sin and say “the devil made me do it” or “original sin made it impossible for me to avoid.”

It is the actual grace of repentance which helps us overcome our pride and acknowledge our guilt. And it is because of our inordinate self-love that we succumb to the devil’s temptations to begin with. Jesus urged us to pray so that we should not fall into temptation because of our soul’s weakness. And, as I said before, God allows us to be tempted so that we may show our love for Him and see for ourselves whether we do love Him enough.

***Prove me, O LORD, and try me; test my heart and my mind
Psalms 26, 2

Therefore thus says the LORD of hosts: “Behold, I will refine them and test them, for what else can I do, because of my people?
Jeremiah 9, 7

“I the LORD search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds.”
Jeremiah 17, 10***

• Proverbs 24

Notice it doesn’t say “it is impossible to be a righteous man so this proverb makes no sense.”

Notice it doesn’t say that it’s possible to be a righteous man without God’s active presence.

There are many morally upright people who sin in small ways. The difference between them and the “wicked” is that they repent, make amends, and try again. It is ridiculous and arrogant to suppose God expects us to be a mirror of his perfection. We must remain humble and continuously repent of our sinfulness while always striving to do better.

But that we all do sin and have to repent and be transformed indicates that there is something inherently and universally wrong with us. This is the stain of original sin.

"For I am the LORD your God. You must consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy."
Leviticus 11, 44

God became man in the person of Jesus Christ to provide a model of perfect holiness which we are expected to strive for in our lives. This model of holy perfection isn’t provided by our natural state. So we are in need of God’s supernatural gift of grace to “be perfect as [our] heavenly Father is perfect”. The more a person sins and repents, the less holy and perfect he is.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Actually it’s more complex and less black and white than you think. …[SNIP]

Isaiah’s prophecy in chapter 14 has absolutely nothing to do with “Satan” as Christians understand a hyper-intelligent demi-god-like powerful being engaged in an eternal war against God. It is explicitly about the king of Babylon. Again, you have “read in” so much to the text. I understand that this is a common Rabbinical practice, but you are reading “Christianity” into these texts which have absolutely nothing to do with Christianity, in my opinion.

I understand the four senses of scripture, but one can’t prove “Christianity” by using the Christological sense to force the Torah or the Prophets to say what you want them to say. I would accept the Christological sense of scripture if I were already a Christian, but since I’m not, it just doesn’t make any sense to me and seems totally unwarranted.

Why ignore the literal or explicit meaning of the text in favor of a complex, mystical interpretation?

if you will hearken to the voice of the Lord your God, to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this Book of the Law; if you turn unto the Lord thy God with all your heart and with all your soul; for this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you neither is it too far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and make us hear it, that we may do it?” Neither is it beyond the sea that you should say: “Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it that we may do it?” The word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it.

-Deuteronomy 30: 10-14

Moses was talking about the full 613 Mitzvot of the Torah for Jews here! If they have the freedom and ability to be good according to such an extensive law, as Moses explicitly says, then it stands to reason we Gentiles, who have only 7 Mitzvot, can be good as well. We have no excuse. We live in God’s world, not the devil’s. We are born innocent, and it is our fault if we become evil.

Today is Yom Kippur. I am not a Jew so I continue to work and argue on the internet. However, today Jews acknowledge their sinfulness and ask for repentance by fasting from all food and drink and praying. In solidarity, we would all do well to acknowledge the same. None of us are perfect, we all sin. But, God is merciful. Just as he refrained from obliterating Nineveh on account of their repentance in ashes, so too he is merciful with us when we repent. Sh-lom.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Not we (infants, or adults), but only unbaptized infants. And we all need God who sustains our existence, rather the Beatific Vision is the subject of loss.

I meant human beings in general. Unbaptized infants are humans. If they can be perfectly happy without knowledge of or relationship with God, then at least some humans can be happy without God.

Unless, are you saying that baptism creates our need for God? That, before baptism, we didn’t need God to be happy, but after baptism, we need God?

Often contemporary preachers say we need a “personal relationship with Jesus” to fill the “God-shaped hole in our hearts.” Limbo would require this to be false, unless we (aka humans) can be perfectly happy with a “God-shaped hole in our hearts.”

There is an implicit assumption in the theology of Limbo that perfect human happiness is attainable without any personal or knowledgeable relationship with God. That seems to contradict the general Christian missionary message.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

We need to strive for perfection in our interior life, which we can’t do without the help of God’s grace. It isn’t enough just to live a morally upright life by observing the letter of the law in fear of God. If we hope to be with God, we must live a divine life. This requires the infusion of the supernatural virtues into our souls and the fabric of our being. God ultimately judges us by our interior states, not by our external acts.

Where does it say that in the Torah? I agree that we can be good only if God allows it, but he allows it for everyone automatically! We are in control of our interior states, if not, then they can’t possibly be our fault or to our credit.

God’s intervening actual grace is providential and involves human cooperation. Adam and Eve fell from God’s grace by choosing to reject God’s providential reign. If we are spiritually dead it’s because of our pride - putting ourselves before God while failing to put our trust in Him, which we are naturally inclined to do collectively.

No, the RCC insists that we are born spiritually dead by default. This makes no sense.

But because of original sin, there was no one who was righteous and had never sinned. There is not one living soul who can honestly stand before God and declare to Him that they are righteous. Only God can make that declaration to man. For this reason only Christ could merit the initial grace of justification and forgiveness and reconcile the whole world with God. The gates of Heaven were closed to all the righteous of the OT until our Lord and Saviour restored the equality of justice between God and mankind.

“There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was sincere and upright, God-fearing and shunning evil.” - Job 1:1

God forbade Moses to enter the promised land because he failed to trust Him and put his faith in himself, not withstanding how morally upright he had been. The promised land is a metaphor for Heaven. Moses’ exclusion represents Adam’s expulsion from paradise for the very same reason. The original sin of pride has alienated the entire human race from God.

If we are alienated, why does Moses tell us the law is close to our hearts? If we cannot do what is right, how can God punish us? That is obviously unjust. “Ought implies can.”

***If I justify myself, my own mouth will condemn me. If I say I’m perfect, it will prove me perverse.
Job 9, 20

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity;
And in sin did my mother conceive me.
Psalm 51, 5***

redeeminggod.com/born-in-sin-psalm-51_5/

It is the actual grace of repentance which helps us overcome our pride and acknowledge our guilt. And it is because of our inordinate self-love that we succumb to the devil’s temptations to begin with. Jesus urged us to pray so that we should not fall into temptation because of our soul’s weakness. And, as I said before, God allows us to be tempted so that we may show our love for Him and see for ourselves whether we do love Him enough.

***Prove me, O LORD, and try me; test my heart and my mind
Psalms 26, 2

Therefore thus says the LORD of hosts: “Behold, I will refine them and test them, for what else can I do, because of my people?
Jeremiah 9, 7

“I the LORD search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds.”
Jeremiah 17, 10***

Ok fair enough, we must repent and remain humble. This is good advice. It doesn’t necessarily imply that we are born spiritually dead, incapable of good works, and deserving of everlasting punishment.

Notice it doesn’t say that it’s possible to be a righteous man without God’s active presence.

That isn’t how this game works. Christians have added this whole theology of grace into the text when it is not there. Imagine if you said a person must drink a diet coke in order to be righteous. When I object by pointing out that the text says absolutely nothing whatever about diet cokes, you can’t respond that it doesn’t say we don’t need a diet coke to be righteous. LOL.

But that we all do sin and have to repent and be transformed indicates that there is something inherently and universally wrong with us. This is the stain of original sin.

"For I am the LORD your God. You must consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy."
Leviticus 11, 44

God became man in the person of Jesus Christ to provide a model of perfect holiness which we are expected to strive for in our lives. This model of holy perfection isn’t provided by our natural state. So we are in need of God’s supernatural gift of grace to “be perfect as [our] heavenly Father is perfect”. The more a person sins and repents, the less holy and perfect he is.

PAX
:heaven:

The fact that we all happen to sin doesn’t seem to warrant the belief that we are intrinsically sinful and born worthy of endless punishment. If it did warrant that belief, why have no Rabbis ever taught this? Why is the Torah silent about it, read in the plain sense? Why did Moses fail to mention anything about original sin and the need for a god-man to save us from it?

 

[Vico]

I meant human beings in general. Unbaptized infants are humans. If they can be perfectly happy without knowledge of or relationship with God, then at least some humans can be happy without God.

Unless, are you saying that baptism creates our need for God? That, before baptism, we didn’t need God to be happy, but after baptism, we need God?

Often contemporary preachers say we need a “personal relationship with Jesus” to fill the “God-shaped hole in our hearts.” Limbo would require this to be false, unless we (aka humans) can be perfectly happy with a “God-shaped hole in our hearts.”

There is an implicit assumption in the theology of Limbo that perfect human happiness is attainable without any personal or knowledgeable relationship with God. That seems to contradict the general Christian missionary message.

That *is *the speculation that “at least some humans can be happy without God.”, that is, the unbaptized infants.

That answer was given in my post: “And we all need God that sustains our existence.”

Contemporary preachers are addressing adults not unbaptized infants, also it is speculation, because this is not revealed.

 

[arte]

These councils which you refer to made no such infallible statements that you think they had. And so the Church continues to hope and put its trust in God’s mercy and justice. :

You are correct. The Second Council of Lyons and the Council of Florence stated: “The souls of those who depart this life in the state of original sin are excluded from the Beatific Vision” (heaven?). This is totally unjust as well. Unbaptised babies and infants have no sin whatsoever on their souls so go straight to heaven. No need for purgatory either.

I did read on other websites that the Second Council of Lyons and the Council of Florence stated: “they descend to hell but suffer unequal punishments to those who die with mortal sins on their soul” or words to that effect.

Indecision is more like it. But it isn’t easy seeing that the Scriptures are unclear and the Patristic Fathers don’t provide sufficient food for thought. I share your hope that the Magisterium will soon resolve the issue definitively. It took centuries for the Church to resolve the question of Mary’s Immaculate Conception. It didn’t take an ecumenical council to put an end to it, but the establishment of the feast day by Pope Sixtus IV in 1476 and finally the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius lX in 1854 to ratify it as a divinely revealed truth. I believe the question of the fate of unbaptised infants and children will take an ex cathedra statement made by a pope because it is just too shrouded in mystery.:

I completely agree. There is a lot of confusion in this area and an ex cathedra statement by the Pope is needed; the sooner the better.

The offense has to be measured in proportion to the person who is being offended. Human beings are equal to each other. God is superior to all human beings. The punishments in Hell are insufficient as compared to what they should be. But God is merciful in His justice. :

Regardless as to whether it’s a sin against God, His justice and mercy should be better than mere humans. God is a being who can create universes so I’m sure He can handle His creation sinning. ** “The punishments in Hell are insufficient as compared to what they should be. But God is merciful in His justice”.**Hell is torture 24/7 for eternity. I think that is far more than “sufficient”. ** God is definitely not merciful or just to pass such a sentence like hell on any human being regardless of their sins. Sentence Adolf Hitler and his ilk to a million years in prison in purgatory or obliterate their souls, both options are more merciful than torture of any kind 24/7 for eternity.

If so, then sin or disorder entered the world as soon as God created the universe. Augustine believed that God created Adam and Eve mortal, but He kept them alive as long as they obeyed Him. In other words, death is the result of disorder, which sin is. Both sin and death can be viewed as concomitant with each other.

:

Obviously sin didn’t enter the World until advanced life forms like us came along but the death of galaxies, stars, planets and with it all life forms including us certainly did. I’m not too sure on the disorder part because the expansion of the universe after the big bang must have been orderly because the universe survived. Augustine had no knowledge of the big bang or the expansion of the universe so would not have known that death entered the World immediately after the big bang.

What is heretical for Catholics is to deny original sin and Hell which are dogmas of the Church. A dogma is an explicit revelation from God. Eternal punishment exists because God is eternal. If we murder someone, God is the one who is ultimately offended.

:

I would rather be called a heretic than believe in original sin and hell; both of which are totally unjust. The Catholic Church or any other Christian or religious dogma is written by fallible men at the end of the day so they can make mistakes.**

 

[OneSheep]

I would rather be called a heretic than believe in original sin and hell; both of which are totally unjust. The Catholic Church or any other Christian or religious dogma is written by fallible men at the end of the day so they can make mistakes.

Hi Arte,

There is an option. This need not be an either/or thing. Two visions of God and cosmos can rest side by side.

In one view, man is negative in some way, some call it “depravity” others say we are “inclined to sin” others “we are part evil”. All of these versions are understandable in the light that we naturally come to resent certain people, and parts of ourselves. This is all part of the development of the conscience. Yes, the resentment creates an illusion of negativity, but the illusion has a purpose. The purpose is that if we pay attention to those negatives, we will avoid doing those hurtful behaviors. Yes, the idea of infants being somehow worthless or deserving of punishment is an extreme, it is an extreme based in the resentment of human nature itself.

There is a place for this thinking, as there is a place for the thinking that there should be a place for all those people we hate so much to suffer forever (hell). It is a motivator to behave.

When a person has grown in love and empathy to the point that he or she does not need those motivators in order to behave morally, then the illusion becomes obsolete. As evidenced in many places, though, it is rare for a person to reach this state of love so that the motivators attain such obsolescence. People who cling to the motivators probably rely on them, so it may be foolhardy to take them away.

In the second view, If,instead you are seeing God as unconditionally loving and forgiving, and you yourself have followed the command to love and forgive everyone, including yourself, then the whole illusion seems cruel.

If that is the case, here are some definitions that you might consider. They are not “Catholic teachings”, per se, but they reflect the unconditional love of our creator, a purpose for all our natural inclinations, and a view that God holds us very, very dear:

Original Sin: The genetic makeup of the human that gives us the capacity to do hurtful things to others. We are born ignorant, and we experience an automatic blindness due to emotional reactions. These are part of such capacity.

Hell: A place of separation. God never separates Himself from us, as He always understands and always forgives. Separation has to do with our own alienation from our own love of God. Sin itself is defined as “alienation”. It is the illusion of separation caused by guilt, resentment and other factors. Another option: hell is a spiritual bootcamp.

On hell: A priest once told us that in his opinion “the only way a person ever goes to hell is if they go screaming and kicking against God the whole way”. If we use the traditional image of hell, I agree with this assessment.

What do you think, does any of that work?

 

[You]

…

I would rather be called a heretic than believe in original sin and hell; both of which are totally unjust. …

I think if hell does not exist there is no reason for christianity. If you think its unjust maybe you don’t understand it.

 

[Good_Fella]

Isaiah’s prophecy in chapter 14 has absolutely nothing to do with “Satan” … It is explicitly about the king of Babylon…

Why ignore the literal or explicit meaning of the text in favor of a complex, mystical interpretation?

Dual fulfilment. But this is a different topic which I don’t want to get into here. Perhaps it’s something you might consider examining.

-Deuteronomy 30: 10-14

Moses was talking about the full 613 Mitzvot of the Torah for Jews here! If they have the freedom and ability to be good according to such an extensive law, as Moses explicitly says, then we Gentiles, who have only 7 Mitzvot, can be good as well… We live in God’s world, not the devil’s. We are born innocent, and it is our fault if we become evil.

**Mitzvoth 67.**Not to exclude a descendant of Esau from the community of Israel for three generations (Deut. 23:8-9)

How does this apply to the Gentiles?

By being merciful, we obtain God’s mercy. We aren’t naturally inclined at first to be merciful, though we can be by overcoming our instincts with God’s help.

**Mitzvoth1.**To know that G-d exists (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 5:6)

How is not knowing that God exists a sin?

Knowing that God exists isn’t enough to be saved. It is not knowing God - understanding and accepting His ways - that lead to eternal damnation. “Whoever does not love does not know God” (1 Jn. 4:8).

“For this is the love of God: to keep his commandments” (1 Jn 5:3). To love God is to obey His commandments. But if we don’t choose to obey them because of our love for God, they have no salvific value. Unconditional love isn’t a natural gift of ours. It is an infused virtue acquired through the Holy Spirit.

**Mitzvoth 16.**That every person shall write a scroll of the Torah for himself.

Oops! Conscientiousness is a sign of genuine faith. By opening our Bibles, we Christians can demonstrate our faith which leads to salvation.

Mitzvoth 126. Not to eat chametz after mid-day on the fourteenth of Nissan (Deut. 16:3)

I don’t eat chametz at the prescribed time, but that doesn’t mean I’m a good person. Being humble is good and pleasing to God.

Noahide law 6. Do not eat of a live animal.

I wouldn’t eat an animal while it’s still living simply because I don’t have the stomach for it. Being civilised isn’t enough to be saved. Jesus said to his Jewish audience that what makes a person unclean is what comes out of their heart - not what they physically consume.

The 613 Mitzvot is a list compiled by the mediaeval Jewish philosopher Maimonides based on Jewish tradition (the oral Torah). Many of the laws apply in practice only to Jews.

The 10 Mega-mitzvah given to Moses by God are all we need, along with Christ’s sermon on the mount and the moral teachings of the apostles in their epistles which fulfil the Mosaic moral law. For the Jews, the 613 commands rest on the spirit of the law.

Finally, if you mean by being born innocent that infants are not morally culpable for any grave personal sins against God, I do agree. But the question of how innocent human beings are when they are born goes far deeper than that. We all are born in the state of original sin, which is simply the deprivation of God’s sanctifying grace in the soul. We do not stand justified before God in our fallen natural state devoid of spiritual life and the preternatural gifts once we enter this world. Yet the fall of mankind does not totally corrupt our nature; it is merely wounded and severs our fellowship with God, but not beyond irreparability. Still we can’t save ourselves from this state, for we cannot restore to ourselves the sanctifying grace which we have lost in this fallen state and human condition True we can perform natural good deeds, but they cannot restore that holy quality to our souls, for God alone can restore that divine gift.

*I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. *
Ezekiel 36, 26

Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again…Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”
John 3, 3-6

If there are people who are disturbed about the declarations of Carthage, Lyons, and Florence on the necessity of baptism, they should take it up with Jesus - God Himself. The Church has an obligation to safeguard and preserve the word of God.

None of us are perfect, we all sin. But, God is merciful. Just as he refrained from obliterating Nineveh on account of their repentance in ashes, so too he is merciful with us when we repent.

We repent as a result of naturally being inclined to sin. The more we repent, the less perfect we are. Our justification before God is an ongoing process. Our goal is to meet the Divine standard of human perfection. But because of our wounded nature, we shall continue to repent and be in need of forgiveness until we die. Purgatory purges our souls of imperfections. Nothing impure can enter Heaven to see God who is All-Holy.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[arte]

Moral evil didn’t exist until some one realised it was wrong to kill or harm another person grievously. It was like a great scientific discovery but far more important and far-reaching - and hardly surprising that it was a unique event in the history of mankind. To presume it was a widespread, simultaneous event is a preconceived opinion for which evidence is required, quite apart from the fact that it is heretical and contradicts the teaching of the Church.

As I said previously, the morals of the first fully modern humans about 200,000 years ago are the morals that were acceptable to them at their particular time. Like our bodies, human morals evolved with time. In the history of mankind in **different times, different tribes/groups and different locations, **humans realised that killing or harming their fellow man was wrong. It was likely to have happened within their own tribe or group. Killing or harming members of your own tribe/group would have been seen to be counterproductive to the tribe/group as a whole. It would have developed (evolved) further from there. **Therefore, I am definitely not saying it was a simultaneous event; rather the opposite. **

I do have a preconceived opinion and so do you. I am actually open to any **real evidence **that you can provide but you are not open to my real evidence. You are still saying: “It was a unique event in the history of mankind. We have gone over the historical component and I proved that there is no historical evidence whatsoever for Adam and Eve and original sin.

Ancient civilisations were certainly aware of morality. In ancient Egypt around 2,375 BC, Maat was the concept of truth, balance, order, law, morality, and justice. You will find other concepts of morality in other ancient civilisations. I have seen several posters here referencing ancient Greek philosophers who spoke on the moral conceptions of mankind. Do I believe the Bible helped? Yes I do. The 10 Commandments are obviously a good grounding for a society. Do I believe Jesus had an impact on our sense of moral behaviour? Yes I do; a massive impact. If the whole World “bought in” to the teachings of Jesus, the World would be a much better place.

Why is it heretical to believe that along with human bodies evolving with time, our minds and sense of right and wrong (morality) evolved with time as well?

The issue is still the origin of morality. That is the primary criterion of whether we are human.

My paragraphs above answer the origin of morality.

 

[Good_Fella]

The fact that we all happen to sin doesn’t seem to warrant the belief that we are *intrinsically sinful and born worthy of endless punishment.
*
The Catholic Church has never taught that man is intrinsically evil. And it has always affirmed that it is in man’s nature to perceive and seek what is good, despite his natural sinful inclinations. This is because man is created in God’s image. The fall changed our relationship with God, not our status. Forensic justification and externally imputed righteousness are inventions of Martin Luther and John Calvin.

After David sinned by committing adultery with Bathsheba and then having her husband Uriah murdered, he contritely responded with this prayer: “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight…” (Psalm 51:4). Since David had sinned against Bathsheba and Uriah, how could he claim to have only sinned against God? David understood that all sin is ultimately against God. God is an eternal and infinite Being (Psalm 90:2). Thus all unrepented mortal sins require an eternal punishment. God’s holy, perfect, and infinite character is offended by our sins. Although to our finite minds our sins are limited in time, to God—who is eternal beyond time—the sins He hates goes on forever. Our sin is eternally before Him and must be eternally punished in order to satisfy His infinite justice.

It’s too late for us to have a fresh start after we die, since we are no longer in the position to choose between loving God by keeping His commandments and rejecting Him on account of our pride and inordinate self-love. After death the condition of the human soul is eternally present, and so the punishment is eternal. To remove the punishment would involve changing that condition of the soul which mattered to the person as not deserving of punishment while he was still living on earth. Hence, if punishment in Hell is not eternal, it is not really punishment at all. And the act of murder or adultery that a man may have committed would in fact not be deserving of punishment.

The souls in Purgatory aren’t being punished for venial sins, but are being purged of impurities and making reparation pending admittance into Heaven. The souls stained with mortal sins belong to people who don’t love God and don’t care about getting to Heaven to be with Him.

Finally, if someone commits murder and robs another person of their life, the just punishment is life in prison. A murderer justly strips himself of the natural right to enjoy life by having taken someone else’s life. Parole is unjust, since the victim is still dead and thereby still offended against objectively. Now the person who was sentenced to life in prison might die of natural causes in a few years. But his sentence still stands: imprisonment for life. And it would remain standing if he could live for another thousands of years. The afterlife never ends, and so the punishment is forever; since God who is offended against lives forever.

If it did warrant that belief, why have no Rabbis ever taught this? Why is the Torah silent about it, read in the plain sense? Why did Moses fail to mention anything about original sin and the need for a god-man to save us from it?

 

[arte]

I think if hell does not exist there is no reason for christianity. If you think its unjust maybe you don’t understand it.

The reason for Christianity does not “fall on the sword’ of hell. In fact, the complete opposite is true. Take hell out of the picture and Christianity becomes far stronger. I fully understand the doctrine of hell but if you think it is just, then maybe you don’t understand it. The title of this thread: “Is eternal suffering pointless?”
There is only one justification for Christianity to teach hell and that is as a fear factor. Using fear to put across a message of love, peace, hope, mercy and forgiveness completely poisons the Christian message.

 

[tonyrey]

As I said previously, the morals of the first fully modern humans about 200,000 years ago are the morals that were acceptable to them at their particular time. Like our bodies, human morals evolved with time. In the history of mankind in **different times, different tribes/groups and different locations, **humans realised that killing or harming their fellow man was wrong. It was likely to have happened within their own tribe or group. Killing or harming members of your own tribe/group would have been seen to be counterproductive to the tribe/group as a whole. It would have developed (evolved) further from there. **Therefore, I am definitely not saying it was a simultaneous event; rather the opposite. **

I do have a preconceived opinion and so do you. I am actually open to any **real evidence **that you can provide but you are not open to my real evidence. You are still saying: “It was a unique event in the history of mankind. We have gone over the historical component and I proved that there is no historical evidence whatsoever for Adam and Eve and original sin.

Ancient civilisations were certainly aware of morality. In ancient Egypt around 2,375 BC, Maat was the concept of truth, balance, order, law, morality, and justice. You will find other concepts of morality in other ancient civilisations. I have seen several posters here referencing ancient Greek philosophers who spoke on the moral conceptions of mankind. Do I believe the Bible helped? Yes I do. The 10 Commandments are obviously a good grounding for a society. Do I believe Jesus had an impact on our sense of moral behaviour? Yes I do; a massive impact. If the whole World “bought in” to the teachings of Jesus, the World would be a much better place.

Why is it heretical to believe that along with human bodies evolving with time, our minds and sense of right and wrong (morality) evolved with time as well?

My paragraphs above answer the origin of morality.

1. Was the account of the Creation in Genesis inspired by God?
2. Was Moses inspired by God?
3. Were the prophets inspired by God?
4. Were the Jews the Chosen People from whom the Messiah was to come?
5. Is Jesus the Son of God?
6. Was Jesus mistaken in His references to the Old Testament?
7. Was Jesus mistaken in his references to Hell?
8. Why did Jesus allow Himself to be tortured and crucified?

 

[tonyrey]

I brought it up during debate with another member concerning the justification of bombing and killing hundreds of thousands of civilians including infants in WW2 where the infants were “sucked out of their mothers’ arms and into the flames”. I was appalled that unbaptised infants could not go to heaven according to the Church’s infallible teaching. If not, where do they go – hell to be burnt? It was not meant to be used in any other "scenario”.

“The Potato Famine was one of the most terrible events in Irish history, had a profound effect on everyone and inevitably led to immorality on an unprecedented scale with many illegitimate babies who dying at birth. It is hardly surprising that some priests overreacted in a desperate attempt to control their flock and the consequences of their attitude survived until quite recently.”

If the above in bold is not trying to defend this disgraceful practice; what is?

To condemn priests who were faced with unprecedented suffering and immorality for trying to deter their parishioners from having illegitimate babies reveals a total lack of compassion and understanding. “Judge not lest you be judged…”

 

[littlestsouls2]

Eternal suffering, although difficult for us to grasp, is a necessary consequence of unrepented mortal sin. God does not desire the death of the sinner, but his repentance and salvation.

A holy soul once said to Our Lord: “Lord, I submit to Thy judgements, but do not push the rigours of Thy justice so far.”
Our Lord replied: “Do you understand what sin is? …”
“I understand, Lord, that sin is an outrage to Thy Majesty.”
“Well, measure, if you can, the greatness of this outrage.”
“Lord, this outrage is infinite, since it attacks infinite Majesty.”
“Must it not, then, be punished by an infinite chastisement? Now, as the punishment could not be infinite in its intensity, justice demands that it be so at least in its duration.”

Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange explains some of the theological reasons for Hell, here:

catholictreasury.info/books/everlasting_life/ev15.php

 

[You]

The reason for Christianity does not “fall on the sword’ of hell. In fact, the complete opposite is true. Take hell out of the picture and Christianity becomes far stronger. I fully understand the doctrine of hell but if you think it is just, then maybe you don’t understand it. The title of this thread: “Is eternal suffering pointless?”
There is only one justification for Christianity to teach hell and that is as a fear factor. Using fear to put across a message of love, peace, hope, mercy and forgiveness completely poisons the Christian message.

The Christian message, as opposed to your message, is to cut off your foot, hand or eye rather than ‘be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire where the worm dies not’.

The worm dies not, and the unquenchable fire. Everything true is most useful to know.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Dual fulfilment. But this is a different topic which I don’t want to get into here. Perhaps it’s something you might consider examining.

Yes, I understand this interpretation of scripture. I used to be Catholic and spent hour upon hour studying the Bible while “reading in” Christianity. Only when I mentally “let go” of this presupposition did I understand how unwarranted these interpretations are. It is the same kind of thinking that makes people believe that Nostradamus’ prophecies, horoscopes, or the “National Treasure” movies are compelling.

**Mitzvoth 67.**Not to exclude a descendant of Esau from the community of Israel for three generations (Deut. 23:8-9)

How does this apply to the Gentiles?

It doesn’t. My point is that Moses tells the Israelites that they have the moral freedom and ability to keep the law. If they can keep their complex and demanding law, surely the rest of humanity should be able to keep a much less complex law!

By being merciful, we obtain God’s mercy. We aren’t naturally inclined at first to be merciful, though we can be by overcoming our instincts with God’s help.

**Mitzvoth1.**To know that G-d exists (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 5:6)

How is not knowing that God exists a sin?

Refusing to acknowledge God is a sin. Each person understands God in a different way though, so we cannot judge.

Knowing that God exists isn’t enough to be saved. It is not knowing God - understanding and accepting His ways - that lead to eternal damnation. “Whoever does not love does not know God” (1 Jn. 4:8).

“For this is the love of God: to keep his commandments” (1 Jn 5:3). To love God is to obey His commandments. But if we don’t choose to obey them because of our love for God, they have no salvific value. Unconditional love isn’t a natural gift of ours. It is an infused virtue acquired through the Holy Spirit.

**Mitzvoth 16.**That every person shall write a scroll of the Torah for himself.

Oops! Conscientiousness is a sign of genuine faith. By opening our Bibles, we Christians can demonstrate our faith which leads to salvation.

Mitzvoth 126. Not to eat chametz after mid-day on the fourteenth of Nissan (Deut. 16:3)

I don’t eat chametz at the prescribed time, but that doesn’t mean I’m a good person. Being humble is good and pleasing to God.

Noahide law 6. Do not eat of a live animal.

I wouldn’t eat an animal while it’s still living simply because I don’t have the stomach for it. Being civilised isn’t enough to be saved. Jesus said to his Jewish audience that what makes a person unclean is what comes out of their heart - not what they physically consume.

Noahide law 6 is more complicated than this. It is technically "do not eat a limb severed from a living animal. It encompasses all animal cruelty and abuse, in my opinion. Other rabbis interpret this law in a more or less strict. It is explicit in the written Torah (Genesis). Jesus was an interesting a compelling Rabbi. I take much inspiration from what I know of his teachings (the gospels). I do not know what he actually taught, free of the Graeco-Roman overlay, but nonetheless I think he is a very inspiring and valuable teacher.

The 613 Mitzvot is a list compiled by the mediaeval Jewish philosopher Maimonides based on Jewish tradition (the oral Torah). Many of the laws apply in practice only to Jews.

Yes. Only the 7 laws of Noah apply to all of humanity.

The 10 Mega-mitzvah…[SNIP]…Purgatory purges our souls of imperfections. Nothing impure can enter Heaven to see God who is All-Holy.

PAX
:heaven:

Regarding the rest: you have not given me a reason to believe in original sin, and thus a need for a god-man savior, and thus a need for the church, or an eternal hell. Your conclusions are dogmatic, not reasonable. Do you understand my difficulty?

I have no reason to suppose all of us are born 1) spiritually dead, 2) deserving of endless punishment and 3) incapable of doing good works without miraculous divine intervention. I have shown that this world-view requires the suspension of common sense and the total embrace of the authority of the RCC. I do not believe the new testament. I do not believe the RCC. Therefore, I am unconvinced. If you could give me a reason to suppose that tiny newborn infants are spiritually dead and deserving of eternal hell then I will re-consider. If you could give me a reason to believe the obvious “good works” performed by the vast majority of humanity (unbaptized) throughout history are actually not good and instead, evil, then I will reconsider.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

The Catholic Church has never taught that man is intrinsically evil. And it has always affirmed that it is in man’s nature to perceive and seek what is good, despite his natural sinful inclinations. This is because man is created in God’s image. The fall changed our relationship with God, not our status. Forensic justification and externally imputed righteousness are inventions of Martin Luther and John Calvin.

What, then, do you call being born spiritually dead, deserving of everlasting punishment, and incapable of doing good works? If that isn’t “intrinsically evil” then I don’t know what is? We’re born “original sinners.” Baltimore tells us we’re born in “mortal sin.” We can’t do anything good, and if we were to die without a miraculous, supernatural intervention (baptism) then we go to hell where we are tortured endlessly. But we’re not intrinsically evil? Does that mean something has made us evil from without? Who or what?

After David sinned by committing adultery with Bathsheba and then having her husband Uriah murdered, he contritely responded with this prayer: “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight…” (Psalm 51:4). Since David had sinned against Bathsheba and Uriah, how could he claim to have only sinned against God? David understood that all sin is ultimately against God. God is an eternal and infinite Being (Psalm 90:2). Thus all unrepented mortal sins require an eternal punishment. God’s holy, perfect, and infinite character is offended by our sins. Although to our finite minds our sins are limited in time, to God—who is eternal beyond time—the sins He hates goes on forever. Our sin is eternally before Him and must be eternally punished in order to satisfy His infinite justice.

It would seem then, according to you, God is unable to forgive. How can forgiveness “satisfy the divine justice?” And yet, he forgave the people of Nineveh. They did not have to sacrifice a god-man to be forgiven. They repented, and God forgave them. According to you, it seems, this is impossible. And yet, God forgave David.

It’s too late for us to have a fresh start after we die, since we are no longer in the position to choose between loving God by keeping His commandments and rejecting Him on account of our pride and inordinate self-love. After death the condition of the human soul is eternally present, and so the punishment is eternal. To remove the punishment would involve changing that condition of the soul which mattered to the person as not deserving of punishment while he was still living on earth. What? Hence, if punishment in Hell is not eternal, it is not really punishment at all. And the act of murder or adultery that a man may have committed would in fact not be deserving of punishment.

What you have said here is basically unintelligible to me, sorry.

The souls in Purgatory aren’t being punished for venial sins, but are being purged of impurities and making reparation pending admittance into Heaven. The souls stained with mortal sins belong to people who don’t love God and don’t care about getting to Heaven to be with Him.

Finally, if someone commits murder and robs another person of their life, the just punishment is life in prison. No, the just punishment is death. God himself prescribes it for many different kinds of crimes.A murderer justly strips himself of the natural right to enjoy life by having taken someone else’s life. Right, that is why he deserves death. Parole is unjust, since the victim is still dead and thereby still offended against objectively. Now the person who was sentenced to life in prison might die of natural causes in a few years. But his sentence still stands: imprisonment for life. And it would remain standing if he could live for another thousands of years. The afterlife never ends, and so the punishment is forever; since God who is offended against lives forever.

I reject this conclusion because I think the premises are wrong.

The fullness of divine revelation is found in the new dispensation. We must first look at the teachings of Jesus and his apostles. God has revealed His mystery gradually.

You believe this, and I do not. That is OK . You go ahead and believe what you think is true, and I don’t think God will punish you for it. However, I still think it is obvious from reason alone that eternal hell is pointless, hence this thread.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[PumpkinCookie]

1. Was the account of the Creation in Genesis inspired by God?

Yes.
2. Was Moses inspired by God?

Yes.
3. Were the prophets inspired by God?

Yes.
4. Were the Jews the Chosen People from whom the Messiah was to come?

Yes.
5. Is Jesus the Son of God?

No.
6. Was Jesus mistaken in His references to the Old Testament?

The gospel authors were mistaken.
7. Was Jesus mistaken in his references to Hell?

The gospel authors were mistaken.
8. Why did Jesus allow Himself to be tortured and crucified?
He didn’t have a choice. The Romans were vicious and cruel. They would not tolerate dissent and rabble-rousing. They crucified many people as a matter of routine. I’m not sure what Jesus was really like, but he must have been a rabble rouser, so it isn’t surprising the Romans would put him to death. Hadrian would utterly obliterate Jerusalem under Bar-Kokba just a few years later. The Romans didn’t mess around.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Eternal suffering, although difficult for us to grasp, is a necessary consequence of unrepented mortal sin. God does not desire the death of the sinner, but his repentance and salvation.

If eternal suffering is necessary, that technically means God is unable, not unwilling, to cause the “death” of the sinner. Many in this thread have argued that hell is logically necessary because human souls exist by necessity once they are created. In that case, God is mistaken when he says that sin leads to death, since we shall live forever no matter how much we sin or what we do. Eternal life is promised to all of us, and if we hate God, he will sustain our rebellion against himself forever and forever.

A holy soul once said to Our Lord: “Lord, I submit to Thy judgements, but do not push the rigours of Thy justice so far.”
Our Lord replied: “Do you understand what sin is? …”
“I understand, Lord, that sin is an outrage to Thy Majesty.”
“Well, measure, if you can, the greatness of this outrage.”
“Lord, this outrage is infinite, since it attacks infinite Majesty.”
“Must it not, then, be punished by an infinite chastisement? Now, as the punishment could not be infinite in its intensity, justice demands that it be so at least in its duration.”

Augustine makes this same argument, but it doesn’t make sense. Consider: do we punish those who offend the weakest among us with the smallest punishments? Usually our intuition of justice is the opposite. We punish harshly those who harm the weak and defenseless, while we may ignore those who harm the powerful and strong. What is a worse crime, to steal $10 from a homeless child or from Goldman Sachs? Clearly, Goldman Sachs is more “majestic” and yet we all should intuit that stealing from the poor child is vastly more evil.

Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange explains some of the theological reasons for Hell, here:

catholictreasury.info/books/everlasting_life/ev15.php

Fr. Garrigou-Lagrane admits the following: “First of all, we admit that this eternity of suffering cannot be demonstrated apodictically.”

So, we can never know from reason that eternal suffering has a point. You just have to believe it despite insufficient reason. To me, that stops the conversation right there. I have no reason to believe in eternal hell, given my faith, so we’re done here, full-stop.