Is it possible that God can relent on the eternal punishment in Hell?

[rinnie]

You quoted, “(2 Cor. 5:21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him)”.

I take this to mean ALL OF THE SINS OF ALL upon Himself, which I believe only God can do.

Therefore since we can only have our own sins and Jesus had EVERYONE’S SINS, no one could be more FULL OF SIN than Jesus, seems pretty simple to me and not only can and should we think about it but we can be grateful that God did this for US in the work of the Incarnation.

I don’t see how anyone can call this an “almost a blasphemy” since it is acknowledging what God did for God’s creation and it is as you quoted, straight from the bible and as I said, something that I was taught and I believe quite a few others were taught.

I think of Jesus, being True God and True Man, as being our (humanity’s) liaison between God and man.

Since Jesus was more full of sin, as it is written: “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin”, than any of us could possibly be, God accomplished for us to be able to approach God, in any condition, at any time.

Something to think of: THE CURTAIN IN THE HOLY OF HOLIES TORE IN HALF, did it not?

No matter how much some wish to sew it back together, it is not sewable, God tore it in half with God’s work on the cross.

What I am saying is that I do NOT know “all of the details” but that God has had God’s Plan since before creation and God’s Plan and God’s Will will come to Fruition.

Okay let me get this right, so you are saying because Jesus was sinless but paid for all sin by his death on the cross, made him a sinner?

Where do you get this stuff. Anyway Jesus was the SPOTLESS Lamb, the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world.

If Jesus sinned, to begin with the scripture you quoted was just contradicted by what you stated.

Your quote states he who knew NO sin, What that scripture says and what the Church and St Paul was stating is this, he who knew NO SIN, took upon the SIN OF MAN, another words he paid for the sins of mans although he was sinless. He died not because he became a sinner, he died because he paid for the sins of sinners.

He could not be the spotless lamb of God who took away the sins of the world if he sinned. If he became a sinner he would not be the SPOTLESS lamb.

 

[rinnie]

Speaking of mortal sin…I have this question…

If mortal sin “cuts us off from God”…then one can presume his grace is withdrawn, he no longer hears our prayers so there is no point in trying until you go into confession?

Who ever said he does not hear our prayers? Who ever said that being in a state of sin, and out of a state of Grace, means God does not hear our prayers?

We are saying if you are in a state of Mortal Sin you must confess that sin to a Priest to be given absolution of that sin. That we do not have the power of the Holy Spirit to forgive mortal sin in his name, only a Priest does.

Anyway read the book of Job. You will see how God would not accept the prayers of Job’s friends. But tells them to ask Job go pray for them, and then he will listen because Job was righteous.

 

[rinnie]

I think that part of the problem of interpretation lies in that scripture often uses poetic language, and in modern times our language is more scientific and analytical.

For example, Jesus “becoming sin” may mean simply that Jesus became an object of resentment in the *perceptions *of his people, not that he took on any type of actual negative characteristic. Is that a poetic approach? Probably not.

Perhaps a poetic approach says something more like: “Jesus embraced us with all of our sins, and said I love you anyway”, or something like that?

You are getting a little better here onesheep. Jesus indeed embraced us all with our sins, but see in the O.T. there was no cure you could say for sin, That is why the dead were held in hades waiting for the Savior to come and release them all from Original Sin. The sin we inherited from Adam and Eve. They had things to do to be release from Actual Sin, but not Original Sin. Only the Savior could do that.

It took Jesus to die for all of us on the cross because he was sinless, so we could be free from original sin.

Baptism is what cleans us from Original Sin, because of Jesus, we are born again. So that is why Catholics baptize babies, what sin could they have? Actual Sin? Of course not, they cannot commit sin yet.
But they are born into original sin, which Baptism wipes away. Original Sin is not confessed. It is actual sin that is what we repent and confess. It is actual sin that can be mortal or venial. That is why Jesus left us the Church that can free us from Actual Sin.

But in the O.T. they could not be free from Original Sin, Only the Savior could release them from that, if they could they would be in heaven instead in hade waiting with Abraham. They were waiting for Jesus, as the First book of the O.T. tells us will come.

That is why Jesus is the New Adam, the Old Adam gave us Original Sin, the New Adam Jesus, freed us from it.

The Blessed Mother is the New Eve, she never sinned, and was faithful to God. The Old Eve disobeyed God.

 

[OneSheep]

You are contradicting yourself my dear. You just said Doctrine is not the same as it was a hundred years ago. Where are you getting your information. Then you say the God and Jesus do not change.

Doctrine is the true word of God. So how could the true word of God change, if God and Jesus don’t change.

Church Doctrine does not change. Could you possibly show me a Church Doctrine that changed? Thanks

Doctrinal changes have to do with emphasis and clarification, as the need arises. For example, the early church did not have to address frozen embryos. Slavery, too: as humans encountered need for clarification, then doctrine had to be added to in order to satisfy the need:

catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0006.html

exerpt:

“First, while Paul told slaves to obey their masters, he made no general defense of slavery, anymore than he made a general defense of the pagan government of Rome, which Christians were also instructed to obey despite its injustices (cf. Rom. 13:1-7). He seems simply to have regarded slavery as an intractable part of the social order, an order that he may well have thought would pass away shortly (1 Cor. 7:29-31).”

The article explains that though Paul never spoke about ending slavery, the teachings added more changes over time. Much later, Guadium et spes in the 20th century gave even stronger language against slavery.

“The Church’s teaching about the dignity and basic equality of all human beings has been clarified to such a degree that any earlier ambiguity about the tolerance of chattel slavery has been eradicated. The Church’s teaching regarding contraception and abortion can also be said to have developed, but not in the direction of approving those practices.”

So, the doctrine changes to clarify the ambiguities. * The approaches to the concepts never change.*

Here are some more examples:

Death penalty:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8506

Usury:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=646

And, of course, the need arose, over time, to address stem cell research, frozen embryos, and other issues involving modern technology.

The Church has not put out, in my reading, a global policy regarding the practice of nuclear deterrence, but many bishops have taken a stand against use of such weapons as a deterrent. Again, clarification is called for.

So, no, God does not change, nor does Jesus change, but revelation unfolds, new issues arise, and doctrine addresses them in new ways that guide and clarify. Literally speaking, though the Church always speaks in favor of Love, Good Will, and Social Justice, what the Church says has to address what is going on in the world, it makes changes to focus on the issues at hand.

What is another issue at hand? Studies of the human mind have revealed much about what “reason” is and when it is accessible, as well as when it is not so. Clarification is called for in addressing the issue. Spiritual Development is coming more and more accepted as a reality. People’s views of God and man change over a lifetime, and the Church needs to make clarifications to address these individual changes without alienating people. So, maybe “change” is too harsh a word. “Clarifications” is a more subtle word.

 

[arte]

I mean you NO disrespect by this post, but even Jesus spoke of the existence of hell during his years on earth. He never said who or how many would be in it and I pray that it will be very few indeed, but He did state that it existed.

Many thanks for your reply Starrsmother. I constantly pray for guidance in these matters especially to Jesus because He spoke more about Hell than anyone else in the Bible. Jesus is my moral compass so I find it very difficult to say what I said in this post and previous posts. For many reasons, I just firmly believe that Hell does not exist. The more I read about Hell or other religious subjects, the more convinced I become that Hell cannot exist. Jesus never gave a number for the souls in hell but He said that only a few will be saved and many will not.

Luke 13:23, 24:
23 And someone said to Him, “Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?” And He said to them, 24"Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able”.

Matthew 7: 13,14
13"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

From several of the Christian sources that I have read on the subject of Hell: “the many will not” becomes the vast majority of mankind. I have explained in other posts: “Who can go to Heaven” as a better way of answering the question: “How many go to Hell?” I won’t do it on this post but if you want, I will do it for you as a reply to this post. Unfortunately, if you believe in Hell, it will not be “very few” which you are praying for. If you believe in Hell, you have to accept that the vast majority of mankind (billions of people) including several millions (if not billions) of children are going there as well. Your own children/grand children could end up in Hell and I am not playing on your emotions by saying that.

The Catholic church is not a buffet line where you get to pick and choose which dogmas you like and wish to believe and which ones don’t appeal to you and you prefer to not accept. Thus you MUST accept the dogma of hell to call yourself Catholic. It isn’t a “fun” dogma and personally I wish it wasn’t a possibility either. Frankly however, my wishes don’t count–nor do yours.

I do not have to accept Hell to call myself a Catholic. I’m bound to get some flak over that statement! I am thinking of our God as He is rightfully described by my rejecting Hell. God loves us far more than we can our own children. He also shows far more mercy to us than we could to our own children. He is also a just God. Therefore, how can our God send any of His children to a place of torture 24/7 for eternity? The set answer is: “We send ourselves to Hell by our own free will – God doesn’t send us there”. If our own free will sent us to a “humane” place of correction for a length of time dependent on the severity and number of sins on our soul, then all the descriptions above of God given to us by our Church (and any other Christian church) would be spot on. However, this is not the case. Eternal torture 24/7 without any hope of reprieve, does not sound remotely like the descriptions of God we are all given. My belief is not a wish. It is a firm belief based on the total acceptance of a God who is loving, merciful, and just.

 

[Starrsmother]

Many thanks for your reply Starrsmother. I constantly pray for guidance in these matters especially to Jesus because He spoke more about Hell than anyone else in the Bible. Jesus is my moral compass so I find it very difficult to say what I said in this post and previous posts. For many reasons, I just firmly believe that Hell does not exist. The more I read about Hell or other religious subjects, the more convinced I become that Hell cannot exist. Jesus never gave a number for the souls in hell but He said that only a few will be saved and many will not.

Luke 13:23, 24:
23 And someone said to Him, “Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?” And He said to them, 24"Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able”.

Matthew 7: 13,14
13"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

From several of the Christian sources that I have read on the subject of Hell: “the many will not” becomes the vast majority of mankind. I have explained in other posts: “Who can go to Heaven” as a better way of answering the question: “How many go to Hell?” I won’t do it on this post but if you want, I will do it for you as a reply to this post. Unfortunately, if you believe in Hell, it will not be “very few” which you are praying for. If you believe in Hell, you have to accept that the vast majority of mankind (billions of people) including several millions (if not billions) of children are going there as well. Your own children/grand children could end up in Hell and I am not playing on your emotions by saying that.

I do not have to accept Hell to call myself a Catholic. I’m bound to get some flak over that statement! I am thinking of our God as He is rightfully described by my rejecting Hell. God loves us far more than we can our own children. He also shows far more mercy to us than we could to our own children. He is also a just God. Therefore, how can our God send any of His children to a place of torture 24/7 for eternity? The set answer is: “We send ourselves to Hell by our own free will – God doesn’t send us there”. If our own free will sent us to a “humane” place of correction for a length of time dependent on the severity and number of sins on our soul, then all the descriptions above of God given to us by our Church (and any other Christian church) would be spot on. However, this is not the case. Eternal torture 24/7 without any hope of reprieve, does not sound remotely like the descriptions of God we are all given. My belief is not a wish. It is a firm belief based on the total acceptance of a God who is loving, merciful, and just.

Arte, I respect your fears and issues with the concept of hell. To be honest, it really isn’t a problem unless one ends up there–would you agree? I think God is merciful and wants all of His creation to be with Him one day in heaven. To that end, He has not only given us the sacraments but even indulgences including plenary indulgence to help us. He knows we are weak humans.

With respect, Sir, I don’t think it much matters whether you believe in hell or not–it’s a little like hiding one’s head in the sand to deny it’s existence when Jesus said it’s real…I understand your concern about the “narrow door” quote. I’ve pondered on that one too. I think what Jesus was trying to tell us–and He spoke so often in parables that sometimes all I can do is give it my best guess, but what I think He was telling us is to not simply try to get to heaven by doing the very least we can to comply with the law–but to go out of our way to be truly Christian–helping the poor, praying regularly, making Mass something we look forward to and attend as often as we can, not just on Sunday to keep the law. The same with confession. Have you ever noticed the long confession lines at Easter time compared with the rest of the year? Why do you think that is? It’s because that is when all those who are content with simply meeting the letter of the law are fulfilling their Easter duty! I think Jesus wants us to love Him as much as He loved us first! We should live our lives for the love of the God who created us and loved us so much He died for us–not just because we fear hell. I think God wants love–not fear.

I truly realize that all my 5 kids may not land in heaven. My youngest daughter is, as I write, living the life of an active homosexual and of course that worries me greatly even as I pray for her daily. Perhaps I won’t make it to heaven either-though I pray I do. We enter this world alone and we leave it the same way. Having said that, look at pedophiles like the one in Fla who abducted and molested a little girl and then buried her alive–or Charles Manson or Jeffrey Dahmer. Are they in hell? I truly don’t know as only God knows what conversion occurs within a human heart at the moment of death. I believe that our God is a just God though–and we either repent on earth or we cannot expect to reach heaven. That’s where the virtue of HOPE comes into the picture!–And again, I respect your thoughts–these are just something to consider!

 

[John_Lazarus]

God would choose mercy, but he can’t, since he cannot contravene his justice. If it were possible, he would have mercy on Judas and Lucifer.

We do not know that He did not, in the case of Judas.

 

[tonyrey]

I had no idea what you might have meant by “It could be thought that He was pervaded with sin”, so I looked up the word “pervaded”.

pervade

verb

1. (transitive) to spread through or throughout, esp subtly or gradually; permeate

Since it is written that, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf”, sounds to me that that could be “exactly” what it means and that only God could have been “pervaded with sin” and CRUSHED the “power of sin”.

Doesn’t it also say somewhere that the “power of sin” has been DESTROYED?

There is bound to be disagreement, Tom, because the terms we are using are metaphorical descriptions of spiritual events. All that matters is that we have been liberated from evil by Jesus:

How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself **unblemished **to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God.

Heb 9:14

Amen.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Jesus never “went to hell”. Even if he died with all the sins of men, his last words “Father into your hands I commend my spirit” indicates repentance. I actually find it offensive that you thought the Father sent Jesus to hell. The Father loves Jesus with perfect love and would never send his own son to hell.

God is mercy. Mercy, is by nature different from justice, although both are in God. We could say that God is justice also, but he by nature is predisposed towards mercy, which is why I said he is mercy. When a sinner dies, mercy pleads for him to be saved, but justice condemns him. God would choose mercy, but he can’t, since he cannot contravene his justice. If it were possible, he would have mercy on Judas and Lucifer.

“My God, My God, why have Thou forsaken Me?”, do you think Jesus said this just to say something or do you think that Jesus said this for a reason?

The “reason” being that this statement, from the psalms, was coming to reality before the ears of those that heard them from Jesus.

Why would you find it offensive that God did more for us, ALL OF US, than many even refuse to think about?

Many, it seems, try to “sugarcoat” the crucifixion, some concerning the physicality, some concerning the spiritual, some concerning both.

If Jesus PAID THE PRICE, than He paid the price, there was much more going on at the cross than just the physical and saying this is NOT downplaying the gruesomeness of the physical aspects of the crucifixion.

When the Apostles asked Jesus about “who can be saved?”, Jesus answered, “With men, it is impossible but with God ALL THINGS are possible”, didn’t He?

Yet here you are saying, “When a sinner dies, mercy pleads for him to be saved, but justice condemns him. God would choose mercy, but he can’t, since he cannot contravene his justice. If it were possible, he would have mercy on Judas and Lucifer.”

Are you saying that Jesus was lying when He said, “with God ALL THINGS are possible” when He was asked something concerning salvation since you said, “When a sinner dies, mercy pleads for him to be saved, but justice condemns him. God would choose mercy, but he can’t,”?

I happen to believe that it is God Who makes God’s decisions, not you, not me, not any human being unless we are including He Who Is True Man and True God, Jesus.

You wrote, “Jesus never “went to hell”. Even if he died with all the sins of men, his last words “Father into your hands I commend my spirit” indicates repentance”.

I don’t look at it as “repentance” but as Jesus saying that He has completed His Work on the cross.

Jesus didn’t need to ask for forgiveness for Himself but He did ask for forgiveness for us.

Jesus TOOK ON OUR SINS, Jesus did not do our sins.

IOW, Jesus took the “punishment” for our “crimes”, and He even told us from the cross, when He said, “IT IS FINISHED” which translates as “Paid in Full”.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Another example of someone using their own interpretation of a teaching or scripture and taking it completely out of context.

Anyway Hades, which is also in the O.T. a words used for hell had different meanings.

Abraham was held in hades, the same as the rich man, as you know from the parable.

Anyway hades, which was also called hell at that time was in levels. Jesus went to hades, or at that time hell to release all the souls held in hades into heaven.

Hell now has one meaning. And it is where the level you could say that the rich man was in.

Are you saying that Jesus “PAID THE PRICE” only for those in the “good part” of hell?

I was taught that Jesus took on EVERYONE’S SINS, not just the sins of those in the “good part” of hades.

Did Jesus take on everyone’s sins or just the sins of some?

 

[Tom_Baum]

Okay let me get this right, so you are saying because Jesus was sinless but paid for all sin by his death on the cross, made him a sinner?

Where do you get this stuff. Anyway Jesus was the SPOTLESS Lamb, the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world.

If Jesus sinned, to begin with the scripture you quoted was just contradicted by what you stated.

Your quote states he who knew NO sin, What that scripture says and what the Church and St Paul was stating is this, he who knew NO SIN, took upon the SIN OF MAN, another words he paid for the sins of mans although he was sinless. He died not because he became a sinner, he died because he paid for the sins of sinners.

He could not be the spotless lamb of God who took away the sins of the world if he sinned. If he became a sinner he would not be the SPOTLESS lamb.

I never said that Jesus sinned and saying or implying that I did, does not change what I wrote.

The simple quote from the bible is, “”(2 Cor. 5:21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him)".

Jesus became SIN by taking on our sins does not mean that Jesus sinned and I never said that He did.

Pretty strong statement and than the statement from Jesus, “My God, My God, why have Thou forsaken Me?”, Jesus did NOT say this just because it was a psalm but because this psalm was coming true before our very ears.

You wrote, “He died not because he became a sinner, he died because he paid for the sins of sinners.”

Jesus took on our sins in paying the price, by the way, do you think that physical death was/is the whole price?

 

[Amandil]

I never said that Jesus sinned and saying or implying that I did, does not change what I wrote.

The simple quote from the bible is, “”(2 Cor. 5:21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him)".

Jesus became SIN by taking on our sins does not mean that Jesus sinned and I never said that He did.

Pretty strong statement and than the statement from Jesus, “My God, My God, why have Thou forsaken Me?”, Jesus did NOT say this just because it was a psalm but because this psalm was coming true before our very ears.

You wrote, “He died not because he became a sinner, he died because he paid for the sins of sinners.”

Jesus took on our sins in paying the price, by the way, do you think that physical death was/is the whole price?

Jesus cited the psalm because the psalm is about confident reliance on God and the victory of the righteous over the unrighteous.

It was common for Rabbis to recite the first sentence of a psalm in order to convey to their hearers the full message of what they were saying.

Combine this with the fact that Jesus was hanging on a cross, dying from suffocation; every word He spoke cost him extreme agony and brought Him closer to death.

 

[glendab]

Hello Tom.

I had no idea what you might have meant by “It could be thought that He was pervaded with sin”, so I looked up the word “pervaded”.

pervade

verb

1. (transitive) to spread through or throughout, esp subtly or gradually; permeate

Since it is written that, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf”, sounds to me that that could be “exactly” what it means and that only God could have been “pervaded with sin” and CRUSHED the “power of sin”.

Doesn’t it also say somewhere that the “power of sin” has been DESTROYED?

I agree with Tony. Being* filled with *something is much different than *taking something on *oneself. The other concern I have is the tense you used. You spoke of Jesus being filled with sin. The is a present tense, meaning now or as in still. The events of Jesus receiving our chastisement happened a long time ago. They are over. When we speak of them we speak in the past tense. This may seem small to some but it is relevant coming from someone who has stated more than once here at CAF that they believe even the fallen angels will be redeemed by God. Too far fetched for my taste.

Glenda

 

[Tbrightson]

Who ever said he does not hear our prayers? Who ever said that being in a state of sin, and out of a state of Grace, means God does not hear our prayers?

We are saying if you are in a state of Mortal Sin you must confess that sin to a Priest to be given absolution of that sin. That we do not have the power of the Holy Spirit to forgive mortal sin in his name, only a Priest does.

Anyway read the book of Job. You will see how God would not accept the prayers of Job’s friends. But tells them to ask Job go pray for them, and then he will listen because Job was righteous.

Perhaps my choice of words is wrong…Of course he can “hear” my prayers, but does he just ignore them? Sounds like that is what is in Job. So if in a state of mortal sin, my prayer for forgiveness, paryer for the well being of my mother, etc may be “heard” but they get thrown into “File 13” so to speak becasue I have “cut my relationship off with God” via mortal sin until I confess right?

 

[glendab]

Hello Tom.

Eve and Mary.

Another problematic statement from you. Mary’s virginity was perpetual, not spiritual. But thanks for sharing.

Glenda

 

[Kurisu35712]

Here is a link to Psalm 22. It’s the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, so it’s the New American Catholic translation. usccb.org/bible/psalms/22

Essentially, it starts off with “Why have you forsaken me?” and pretty much details Christ’s Passion. Just wanted easy access to the entire Psalm since it’s been brought up a few times.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Hello Tom.

I agree with Tony. Being* filled with *something is much different than *taking something on *oneself. The other concern I have is the tense you used. You spoke of Jesus being filled with sin. The is a present tense, meaning now or as in still. The events of Jesus receiving our chastisement happened a long time ago. They are over. When we speak of them we speak in the past tense. This may seem small to some but it is relevant coming from someone who has stated more than once here at CAF that they believe even the fallen angels will be redeemed by God. Too far fetched for my taste.

Glenda

The bible says that JESUS BECAME SIN, that sounds pretty intense to me.

Seems to me that someone, somewhere got the idea that Mary was sinless since she was “full of grace”, didn’t they?

I don’t believe that anyone less than God could have taken ALL of Everyone’s Sins.

God-Incarnate, taking on ALL Sin and Sins and being full of sin as to become sin would stretch, so to speak, God from one spectrum to another and encompass ALL.

We do God no favor by trying to sugarcoat what God did for us, God went to the uttermost depths of hell for ALL of us, we should be appalled that anyone should suggest that God did anything less!

You wrote, “This may seem small to some but it is relevant coming from someone who has stated more than once here at CAF that they believe even the fallen angels will be redeemed by God.”, I have never said this specifically but I have said that I believe that God has redeemed and saved ALL OF GOD’S CREATION so I guess this is where you may have come up with what you wrote here.

Thanks for pointing this out to me, I hope God is “better, much better”, than many even seem to want God to be.

As Jesus told us concerning salvation, “With man it is impossible, with God ALL THINGS are possible”.

Thank you God for Your Plan and I believe that the “big surprise” shall indeed surprise many, believers and non-believers alike.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Hello Tom.

Another problematic statement from you. Mary’s virginity was perpetual, not spiritual. But thanks for sharing.

Glenda

Eve supposedly was sinless before the fall, was she not?

Mary was supposedly sinless, as in the fall did not contaminate her and she was “full of grace”, correct?

Wasn’t Adam and Eve and Mary supposedly all free of sin at one time?

Wasn’t it Mary that was supposedly the only one who made it thru her life without sin out of these three?

I happen to believe that Mary’s virginity, Spiritual virginity, is one of a kind, you look at Mary’s virginity as Perpetual and biological therefore Mary is one among many who this could be said of, correct?

Mary pondered, I think that it is a good thing to ponder and I think that it was/is Mary, among others, who have set an example that pondering can be good.

 

[glendab]

Hello Tom.

Eve supposedly was sinless before the fall, was she not?

Mary was supposedly sinless, as in the fall did not contaminate her and she was “full of grace”, correct?

Wasn’t Adam and Eve and Mary supposedly all free of sin at one time?

Wasn’t it Mary that was supposedly the only one who made it thru her life without sin out of these three?

I happen to believe that Mary’s virginity, Spiritual virginity, is one of a kind, you look at Mary’s virginity as Perpetual and biological therefore Mary is one among many who this could be said of, correct?

Mary pondered, I think that it is a good thing to ponder and I think that it was/is Mary, among others, who have set an example that pondering can be good.

Thank you for explaining your point of view. I take then that you value a spiritual virginity over a physical virginity? And if so, how does this apply to Eve and Mary and other women? Just curious. Thanks.

Glenda

 

[Tom_Baum]

Here is a link to Psalm 22. It’s the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, so it’s the New American Catholic translation. usccb.org/bible/psalms/22

Essentially, it starts off with “Why have you forsaken me?” and pretty much details Christ’s Passion. Just wanted easy access to the entire Psalm since it’s been brought up a few times.

I happen to believe that this psalm was a prophecy of something that was to happen in the future and that the “future” that this prophecy came to be fufilled was Jesus’s Crucifixion.