Is eternal suffering pointless?

[rinnie]

Relying on the position that hell serves no purpose since we don’t know of any redemption from its darkness, the pain there would be useless. that argument/reality/position is one of the most prevalent criticisms of our religion, and why the “religion” gets rejected, and Christ along with it. a tragedy of false assumption.

Exactly, it is a false assumption. That is why we as Catholic’s are taught there is always a great purpose in suffering,

Just because we cannot always know the purpose of our pain, does in no way make the pain unreal.

The purpose of hell is the rejection of God. As we are taught with Satan his life is full of anger, unhappiness, discontentment etc. Every single misery we can think of.

The reason for this is because he refuses to obey and worship God.

Non-believers in this world say why would anyone want to have a life of total pain, and suffering in hell and choose the next world.

A believer agrees, but also says and adds the same reason they choose it in this world.

People choose to reject God in this world by using free will, the same way they do it in the next.

 

[rinnie]

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.

Why would we say or try to convince you that a tiny newborn is deserving hell, when first of all it is not the word of God, and 2nd is the complete opposite of the word of God.

(God said let the children come to me, for it is of these that the kingdom of God is made of.

Why would we say that someone that it not baptized in the RCC are incapable of receiving his grace and by that grace can do good deeds? When again is the complete opposite of our faith.

We put no restrictions on our God. While the Church can only teach how we as humans can give ourselves to our God, and what we can humanly do to offer our Children to the Holy Spirit in Baptism, in no way claims that God himself cannot find other ways.

 

[rinnie]

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.

You want a reason to believe in Original Sin. Let me turn this around. In the beginning the world was pure and perfect and was paradise. There was no sin, no death, and no hard labor.

Once sin entered the world (when Adam and Eve sinned Original Sin) they were thrown out of the garden of Eden.

Now you show me how Original Sin never existed, nor sin exists, and how this world is the Garden of Eden.

And you are truly saying this world does not need a Savior??? Are you for real? This world in your opinion is indeed paradise in your opinion? You are truly saying you love this world, all of its hate, murder etc. And no, I totally cannot understanding your difficulty to understand why we want a GOD who can take away all of this. And who will.

And I cannot believe that you do not need the Church to help you to rid yourself of the sin that you have in your heart and life. That you can truly say that you do not need the Church, because you are sinless and have no need for it, because as we as Catholics are sinners and need the help of God and his Church to help us to become more like him, and not the world.

We Catholic’s ADMIT our sin, our evils we commit, jealousy at time, lust, anger, etc.

For it is only these who indeed need the Church.

So either you have no sin, or if you admit sin, how is your means of ridding yourself of it. We as Catholic’s know we are no capable of it if ridding ourselves of Sin, that is why we needed and continue to need a Savior. What is truly your claim?

 

[littlestsouls2]

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.

Sin leads to spiritual death. In such a state, the soul is incapable of receiving sanctifying grace, which is to the soul what food and water is to the body. This is only an analogy, of course.

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.

What about crucifying a poor man, Who is the Son of God? What about wasting the precious graces that He has obtained for us, the value of which are infinite (according to sound theology)?

Is it worse to steal from one king or two? Five or ten? Well, the dignity and goodness of God is infinite; His very essence is goodness. To offend God is incomparably worse than offending an infinite number of earthly kings.

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.

He is merely saying that we cannot demonstrate the fact of an eternity of suffering - it is a matter of faith; he is not saying that we cannot demonstrate that eternal suffering is reasonable or true in light of revelation. In other words, God has revealed to us that Hell is eternal; we cannot discover this by reason alone, though reason confirms the necessity of Hell, given the possibility of dying in (unrepented) mortal sin.

God is Love. God still loves the damned, in the sense that, if it were consistent with His justice, He would save them. God cannot annihilate those He loves. (I must make a brief distinction. Souls in mortal sin are enemies of God in one sense - i.e. they cannot receive His love - but He still loves them; otherwise souls would never be drawn from mortal sin to repentance).

 

[rinnie]

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.

Sin leads to spiritual death. In such a state, the soul is incapable of receiving sanctifying grace, which is to the soul what food and water is to the body. This is only an analogy, of course.

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.

What about crucifying a poor man, Who is the Son of God? What about wasting the precious graces that He has obtained for us, the value of which are infinite (according to sound theology)?

Is it worse to steal from one king or two? Five or ten? Well, the dignity and goodness of God is infinite; His very essence is goodness. To offend God is incomparably worse than offending an infinite number of earthly kings.

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.

He is merely saying that we cannot demonstrate the fact of an eternity of suffering - it is a matter of faith; he is not saying that we cannot demonstrate that eternal suffering is reasonable or true in light of revelation. In other words, God has revealed to us that Hell is eternal; we cannot discover this by reason alone, though reason confirms the necessity of Hell, given the possibility of dying in (unrepented) mortal sin.

God is Love. God still loves the damned, in the sense that, if it were consistent with His justice, He would save them. God cannot annihilate those He loves. (I must make a brief distinction. Souls in mortal sin are enemies of God in one sense - i.e. they cannot receive His love - but He still loves them; otherwise souls would never be drawn from mortal sin to repentance).

I disagree with you on how we can never know from reason that eternal suffering has a point.

Eternal Suffering does have a point. A huge valid point. Eternal suffering is life without God, It is when a person refuses to accept God, and choose to live without him.

It is choosing love of self, love of sin, over the love of God. It is when you would rather live in a state of unhappiness then to repent and confess and forego sin.

The reason for Eternal Suffering is all through the bible. It is told, you choose to serve your father, you father is Satan.

If you choose to serve God you have eternal life with him, if not eternal life without him.

 

[tonyrey]

Is Jesus the Son of God?

No.

**?

****My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? ****

Why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? 2 O my God, I cry in the day time, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, and am not silent.
3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.
4 Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
5 They cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.**
6But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.****
7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
8 He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.
9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts.
10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother’s belly.
11 Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help.
12 Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.**
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
18They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
19 But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
20 Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
21 Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.
23 Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.**
24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.**
25 My praise shall be of thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that fear him.
26 The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the Lord that seek him: your heart shall live for ever.
27**All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.**** Psalm 22

The gospel authors were mistaken.

?

The gospel authors were mistaken.

?

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.

Jesus certainly had a choice. He predicted He would be put to death and was determined to fulfil His mission:

He was spurned and avoided by men, a man of suffering, knowing pain,
Like one from whom you turn your face,
spurned, and we held him in no esteem.c
4Yet it was our pain that he bore,
our sufferings he endured.
We thought of him as stricken,
struck down by God* and afflicted,d
5But he was pierced for our sins,
crushed for our iniquity.
He bore the punishment that makes us whole,
by his wounds we were healed.e
6We had all gone astray like sheep,
all following our own way;
But the LORD laid upon him*
the guilt of us all.f
7Though harshly treated, he submitted
and did not open his mouth;
Like a lamb led to slaughter
or a sheep silent before shearers,
he did not open his mouth.g
8Seized and condemned, he was taken away.
Who would have thought any more of his destiny?
For he was cut off from the land of the living,
struck for the sins of his people.
9He was given a grave among the wicked,
a burial place with evildoers,
Though he had done no wrong,
nor was deceit found in his mouth.h
10But it was the LORD’s will to crush him with pain.
By making his life as a reparation offering,*
he shall see his offspring, shall lengthen his days,
and the LORD’s will shall be accomplished through him.
11Because of his anguish he shall see the light;
because of his knowledge he shall be content;
My servant, the just one, shall justify the many,
their iniquity he shall bear.
12Therefore I will give him his portion among the many,
and he shall divide the spoils with the mighty,
Because he surrendered himself to death,
was counted among the transgressors,
Bore the sins of many,
and interceded for the transgressors.

Isaiah 53

These prophecies were made hundreds of years before Jesus was born…

 

[littlestsouls2]

I disagree with you on how we can never know from reason that eternal suffering has a point.

Eternal Suffering does have a point. A huge valid point. Eternal suffering is life without God, It is when a person refuses to accept God, and choose to live without him.

It is choosing love of self, love of sin, over the love of God. It is when you would rather live in a state of unhappiness then to repent and confess and forego sin.

The reason for Eternal Suffering is all through the bible. It is told, you choose to serve your father, you father is Satan.

If you choose to serve God you have eternal life with him, if not eternal life without him.

Hi rinnie,

I agree with what you have written. You misunderstood me; I said that Lagrange “is merely saying that we cannot demonstrate the fact of an eternity of suffering” i.e. we cannot prove that Hell is eternal, without first consulting divine revelation. Lagrange “is not saying that we cannot demonstrate that eternal suffering is reasonable or true in light of revelation.”

 

[Good_Fella]

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?

Yes, I do. Blindness.

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.

That’s because you refuse to listen. This might take divine intervention. The dispensation of grace isn’t miraculous. It’s providential and requires human cooperation through the exercise of our natural faculties.

Obviously you believe that human beings are both holy and inclined to sin. God is holy, but is He inclined to sin? Unless the human soul is sanctified by God and acquires a quality by His standard of human perfection it is unholy and therefore spiritually dead.

I have shown that this world-view requires the suspension of common sense and the total embrace of the authority of the RCC.

Does common sense tell you that human beings aren’t sinful by nature and inclined to sin? If they weren’t, they wouldn’t sin. We sin because sinning is part of our nature. Experience tells us that. Original sin is a state. It’s the sin of pride and inordinate self-love which alienates us from God.

I do not believe the new testament. I do not believe the RCC. Therefore, I am unconvinced.

“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”
St. Thomas Aquinas

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.

You have already made up your mind that there is no reason to suppose this. Anyway, no unsanctified soul can see God. And only God can sanctify it. Job was humble enough to own that he could not justify himself before God. Only God can declare us just by His grace. Has pride overtaken you by any chance?

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.

Nobody has said that the good works of unbaptized people are necessarily evil. But good works that aren’t done in faith by anyone do not please God. God judges the heart that lies behind any good work of ours. God does take human intentions into account when he judges us by our deeds. Many people do good works, but not in the spirit of charity.

PAX

:heaven:

 

[Good_Fella]

PumpkinCookie;13308834]

                                                            NOTICE

I would like to respond, but only if you don’t insert your comments in between what I am being quoted to have said. This is the second time you’ve done this, and I don’t have the time or the patience to have to fix everything before I reply.

 

[arte]

I see you’ve moved away from our debate on original sin or have you?.

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

No, definitely not. It was the only way people at that time could account for what they saw around them. Creation myths appear in lots of cultures and religions throughout the World and are the most common form of myth.

1. Was Moses inspired by God?

Numbers 31: 1,2, 7,9, 14-18
1.Yahweh spoke to Moses and said,
2 ‘Exact the full vengeance for the Israelites on the Midianites. Afterwards you will be gathered to your people.’
7 They made war on Midian, as Yahweh had ordered Moses, and put every male to death.
9 The Israelites took the Midianite women and their little ones captive and carried off all their cattle, all their flocks and all their goods as booty.
14 Moses was enraged with the officers of the army, the commanders of the thousands and commanders of the hundreds, who had come back from this military expedition.
15 He said, 'Why have you spared the life of all the women?
16 They were the very ones who, on Balaam’s advice, caused the Israelites to be unfaithful to Yahweh in the affair at Peor: hence the plague which struck Yahweh’s community.
17 So kill all the male children and kill all the women who have ever slept with a man;
18 but spare the lives of the young girls who have never slept with a man, and keep them for yourselves.
So this is a prophet of God and this is a loving and forgiving God. It reads very much like verses from the Quran and the Hadith. You can see where Mohamed got his inspiration from. Moses was not inspired by God during the above incident; God had nothing to do with it. There are “followers of God” behaving in the same way as Moses did in the above incident; they’re called ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, etc. I read on a Protestant website that God was doing the children a favour in the above incident because had He allowed them to live, He would have had to put them in hell. Sick, very sick. You can see where a belief in hell leads you.

1. Were the prophets inspired by God?

With the exception of incidents similar to the above and anything to do with hell being eternal suffering they were or believed they were inspired by God. I have already covered Adam and Eve in my answer to Q1. In fact my answer to Q1 could be used to sweep up any other obviously flawed prophesy.

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

No, because we are all God’s chosen people – every human being on this planet.

1. Is Jesus the Son of God?

In the main but not entirely so, my belief in Jesus being the Son of God is down to a personal revelation.

1. Was Jesus mistaken in His references to the Old Testament?

Jesus was also a human being – a man capable of human emotions such as anger etc and making mistakes. Notwithstanding that, I find the following to be an important caveat when the Gospel writers describe anything Jesus said: The Gospel writers portray Jesus as a biblically literate 1st century Jewish male who was steeped in the scripture and the culture – he was localized in a time and place. I may be mistaken but I cannot recall Jesus ever mentioning Adam and Eve if that is the way you are heading with this.

1. Was Jesus mistaken in his references to Hell?

As I have mentioned several times before, I am a Christian Universalist when it comes to hell. Therefore, I believe anything that Jesus mentioned or indicated on hell has been either mistranslated or interpreted incorrectly. The above caveat also comes into play.

1. Why did Jesus allow Himself to be tortured and crucified?

He was resigned to His fate. He was a total pacifist and with the exception of getting angry, He would not harm anyone even if it meant He could escape. I think every Christian has a problem with “turn the other cheek”.

 

[arte]

People choose to reject God in this world by using free will, the same way they do it in the next.

How do you know what people do in the afterlife? No one does. A simple scenario: a sinner dies and he is faced with a choice; either go to hell or accept me as God. What would anyone do in that position? It’s likely they would choose to accept God and not reject Him.

 

[jmcrae]

How do you know what people do in the afterlife? No one does. A simple scenario: a sinner dies and he is faced with a choice; either go to hell or accept me as God. What would anyone do in that position? It’s likely they would choose to accept God and not reject Him.

There are no second chances in the Afterlife. Our opportunity to choose God happens in this life; it is the consequence of that choice that takes place in the afterlife.

An analogy that works for me is that every child is told from an early age that they will get their best opportunities in this life if they do well in school and qualify for University.

Every child is innocent and deserves to go to University in order to become a prosperous adult. Yet, not every child works hard in school, so not every young adult gets to go to University. Choices made day after day throughout one’s school years add up and accumulate either into University readiness or the welfare line-up.

In the same way, it’s the choices we make here in this life that accumulate and add up to our end result in the afterlife. God doesn’t come along at the moment of death and offer you a choice; rather, He comes to you at the moment of death and shows you what you have chosen.

 

[arte]

There are no second chances in the Afterlife. Our opportunity to choose God happens in this life; it is the consequence of that choice that takes place in the afterlife.

I was answering an O/P’s post where he/she stated: “People choose to reject God in this world by using free will, the same way they do it in the next”.

An analogy that works for me is that every child is told from an early age that they will get their best opportunities in this life if they do well in school and qualify for University.

Every child is innocent and deserves to go to University in order to become a prosperous adult. Yet, not every child works hard in school, so not every young adult gets to go to University. Choices made day after day throughout one’s school years add up and accumulate either into University readiness or the welfare line-up.

In the same way, it’s the choices we make here in this life that accumulate and add up to our end result in the afterlife. God doesn’t come along at the moment of death and offer you a choice; rather, He comes to you at the moment of death and shows you what you have chosen.

Regardless of what anyone has chosen, it should not lead to torture 24/7 for eternity. The description of hell goes from burring in everlasting fire to the absence of God and everything in between. Hell is completely pointless and serves no purpose other than a fear factor. Would you torture anyone just for a few seconds? No you wouldn’t yet you expect God to torture someone for eternity. And it is God doing the torturing at the end of the day regardless of the comments such as “we put ourselves in hell” and “we have free will” and “we make the choice etc”. God is the judge and He awards the penalty so He cannot be much of a loving, forgiving, just and merciful divine being if He punishes anyone for eternity with no hope of a reprieve – no matter how you or anyone else cuts and dices it. I have said this before but it needs saying again. Human beings show more love, forgiveness, justice and mercy than a divine being

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Human beings show more love, forgiveness, justice and mercy than a divine being

This is obviously wrong since God is Love, and love has to do with forgiveness, justice and mercy.
The question then becomes one having to do with your understanding of hell and human nature.
A cursory look at the news, any day will reveal how human beings are deserving of hell.
From what I’ve heard Pope John Paul ll, a saint went to confession every week; we are apt to sin.
It is through God’s mercy, Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, that we may be spared that eventuality.
It then becomes a matter of the nature of God and what is His purpose in creating us.
Through us, creation is able to enter into the divine loving relationship that is the Trinity.
Love must be freely given; ultimately, we must surrender all that we are to God, to enter into the filial relationship that is the Son.
Not everyone wishes to do so. In giving, we become more Christ-like. Failing to do so, makes takes us in the opposite direction.
We have the opportunity to change up to the last moment before death. As far as I know, when you are dead, you are dead.
When this all comes to an end, all that remains is what exists in God’s eternal Now as it is in the reality of one’s relationship with God.
All creation, every time and every place, whole is centred on our Creator, our Father, in communion with Him through the Holy Spirit and Christ within us.
Fact is that the first of this world will be last, those who would save their life will lose it; basically, you have to love to know Love.
It’s been revealed that there is a resurrection in which the kernel of our past life, will give rise to a new glorious body.
Seems pretty clear to me that we should take what we do in this life very seriously. Forget the nightmarish images, this is reality and what we build here, we do so for eternity.

 

[tonyrey]

I see you’ve moved away from our debate on original sin or have you?

It is clear from your answers you are not a Catholic. You have totally ignored the prophecies that Jesus fulfilled by suffering and dying for us to redeem us from our sins. You reject the allegorical account of Creation and original sin in Genesis, do not regard the Jews as the Chosen People from whom the Messiah was to come and you ignore the uniqueness of their monotheism. Your faith is based on a private revelation instead of the teaching of the Church.You give the impression that Jesus was no more than “biblically literate 1st century Jewish male” and attribute all His statements about Hell (of which there are many) to mistranslation or misinterpretation.Your inability to explain why Jesus chose to suffer and die leads you to the hypothesis that He was simply a pacifist who was misguided in telling us to turn the other cheek. No wonder you reject original sin and the need for baptism - and claim eternal suffering is pointless… “**Human beings show more love, forgiveness, justice and mercy than a divine being” **sums up your rejection of Christianity perfectly.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Why would we say or try to convince you that a tiny newborn is deserving hell, when first of all it is not the word of God, and 2nd is the complete opposite of the word of God.

(God said let the children come to me, for it is of these that the kingdom of God is made of.

Why would we say that someone that it not baptized in the RCC are incapable of receiving his grace and by that grace can do good deeds? When again is the complete opposite of our faith.

We put no restrictions on our God. While the Church can only teach how we as humans can give ourselves to our God, and what we can humanly do to offer our Children to the Holy Spirit in Baptism, in no way claims that God himself cannot find other ways.

The RCC teaches explicitly that baptism is required for salvation. The opposite of salvation is damnation. This baptism can take several forms: water, desire, blood. It seems unlikely that babies are capable of the baptism of desire or blood. Hence, it seems likely that unbaptized babies who die without water baptism are hellbound. This is obvious. Read Trent. Read Augustine. Read the Baltimore Catechism.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

You want a reason to believe in Original Sin. Let me turn this around. In the beginning the world was pure and perfect and was paradise. There was no sin, no death, and no hard labor.

Once sin entered the world (when Adam and Eve sinned Original Sin) they were thrown out of the garden of Eden.

Now you show me how Original Sin never existed, nor sin exists, and how this world is the Garden of Eden.

And you are truly saying this world does not need a Savior??? Are you for real? This world in your opinion is indeed paradise in your opinion? You are truly saying you love this world, all of its hate, murder etc. And no, I totally cannot understanding your difficulty to understand why we want a GOD who can take away all of this. And who will.

And I cannot believe that you do not need the Church to help you to rid yourself of the sin that you have in your heart and life. That you can truly say that you do not need the Church, because you are sinless and have no need for it, because as we as Catholics are sinners and need the help of God and his Church to help us to become more like him, and not the world.

We Catholic’s ADMIT our sin, our evils we commit, jealousy at time, lust, anger, etc.

For it is only these who indeed need the Church.

So either you have no sin, or if you admit sin, how is your means of ridding yourself of it. We as Catholic’s know we are no capable of it if ridding ourselves of Sin, that is why we needed and continue to need a Savior. What is truly your claim?

You have no evidence that the earth was ever a perfect paradise. Science has given us abundant evidence showing the chaotic and violent history of our universe spanning billions of years. Violence and death have been with us since the beginning. Possibly, God preserved Adam and Eve from this natural state via a supernatural intervention.

The default assumption of pretty much all human cultures is that human beings are born innocent. Notions of justice and innocence are incoherent if we are born guilty.

This world does need a savior: God. Jesus is not God, and it is abundantly clear he is not the savior since the world has continued in unabated rebellion against God since the tmie of Jesus. There is no reason to suppose a positive trend toward God and righteousness. The prophets tell us the messiah will bring universal recognition of God and obedience to the Torah. This hasn’t happened. Bottom line. Even Christendom was evidently not a redeemed paradise on earth even though everyone was a Catholic. Death, foolishness, misery, selfishness, and all forms of evil abound regardless of culture or religion. Why is this, if Jesus is both God and the messiah?

People freely choose to be selfish. It is their own fault, and they rightly shoulder the blame. No devils, no “original sin,” can excuse the freely chosen selfishness and foolishness that causes misery in our world. It isn’t the devil’s fault. It isn’t our nature. It is our fault. We are to blame. However, children have no such blame and are born totally innocent. They need no savior, they need no redemption, they have done nothing wrong!

We do not need magical sacraments or wishful thinking to avoid sin. We need to discipline ourselves and follow our consciences. When we fail, we must humbly repent and try again. We must be relentless in our pursuit of goodness and justice, and not put our faith in magic, other human beings, other gods, or intermediaries. God rules this universe alone, totally unopposed, and we are to rely on him alone. God is merciful and forgiving, and both demands and allows us to be good. We start out good, and it is only by our vicious choices that we become evil and worthy of punishment.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

I disagree with you on how we can never know from reason that eternal suffering has a point.

Eternal Suffering does have a point. A huge valid point. Eternal suffering is life without God, It is when a person refuses to accept God, and choose to live without him.

It is choosing love of self, love of sin, over the love of God. It is when you would rather live in a state of unhappiness then to repent and confess and forego sin.

The reason for Eternal Suffering is all through the bible. It is told, you choose to serve your father, you father is Satan.

If you choose to serve God you have eternal life with him, if not eternal life without him.

If the point of endless hell is to enable people to choose endless hell, it means God desires endless suffering for its own sake. That is profoundly evil. God is not evil, so this can’t be the point of hell.

 

[arte]

You want a reason to believe in Original Sin. Let me turn this around. In the beginning the world was pure and perfect and was paradise. There was no sin, no death, and no hard labor.

What is your historical evidence for the above statement?

Now you show me how Original Sin never existed, nor sin exists, and how this world is the Garden of Eden

.
You are stating the positive here. Please show me how original sin existed?

 

[OneSheep]

Exactly, it is a false assumption. That is why we as Catholic’s are taught there is always a great purpose in suffering,

Just because we cannot always know the purpose of our pain, does in no way make the pain unreal.

Hi rinnie,

I don’t know about you, but looking back all of my suffering was because I had to do things the wrong way to discover the right way. How about you, brother?

The purpose of hell is the rejection of God.

People choose to reject God in this world by using free will, the same way they do it in the next.

Yes, we have the illusion that we are freely choosing to reject God, but people do this unwittingly. Can you describe someone rejecting God knowingly and willingly?

It doesn’t happen, in my observations, but I could be wrong.

How about this?

Q: Is eternal suffering pointless? A: for an individual, yes.

Q: Is the threat of eternal suffering a help to control society? Yes, probably.