B
bisco
Guest
when you relish your own interpretation of the bible over God’s representatives on earth, you make yourself into a god.
Is it possible that God can relent on the eternal punishment in Hell?
- Status
A
Aloysium
Guest
You are aware that this “despicable conception” is how pride, sin in general, sees God, who is wonderful and the principal enemy of sin.
A person who does not reject Satan, his works and promises cannot be in heaven.
Because that person is all for themselves, they cannot but hate heaven.
There it is all about giving.
Love is a ripping out of everything a person is, if they are sin.
G
glendab
Guest
Hello Tom.
Thank you God for the gift of faith.
Glenda
This whole post proves the theory that if you fall for one error, it effects the way you see God on the whole. You are in the process of changing God to suit your errors. It is the same thing when the Protestants eliminate Marian doctrine from their thinking. All of a sudden their understanding of God changes and He morphs into a person suitable to their means. They adjust their theology accordingly. It is a process. That is why we eliminate errors, because you can’t be a little bit pregnant. Eventually you deliver the whole baby!
Thank you God for the gift of faith.
Glenda
R
rinnie
Guest
Well according to the word of God if you are in a state of mortal sin, you are indeed separated from him. And it is something we should all fear.
R
rinnie
Guest
Well, now remember Purgatory is the final cleansing we get before we become eligible you could say for heaven.
Now to me, repenting is not only asking for forgives, it is doing some kind of penance for that sin.
So to me Purgatory means you indeed were forgiven, which means you are sorry and have regret at the time of your death, but did not have the time to go to a Priest, or maybe could not have received last Rites. With that said.
Purgatory means you are indeed forgiven but need to be completely cleansed of some kind of sin.
I mean face it, if at the time of your death, you have repented completely all of your sin, and paid every penny, would you not indeed be a Saint and go straight to heaven?
Where do you believe someone goes if at the time of their death they have unrepented sin, or shall I say to be more clear, have sin that you need to have a final cleansing from? Do you not agree that the final cleansing, or temporary distress we could say if not a kind of a repentance?
R
rinnie
Guest
According to the RCC everyone has a chance to Purgatory no matter what faith. And People who by no fault of their own live out their life according to the best that they know can enter heaven.
How could we call our God a Merciful God if he would hold someone to a teaching they do not have or know? But the answer is no. Our Church teaches God judges us by our faith we live and by what we know and understand. He does not send anyone to hell just because they did not have the Grace given to them, they we have.
On the other hand the Church does teach that if you have the full understanding and teaching and refuse to accept it and live it, you have put your soul in Mortal Danger. And asks that you be safe, and reunite yourself as quick as possible.
B
bisco
Guest
no, i can’t agree with that, unless i’m incorrect about church teaching. i think you have to repent while you’re alive and purgatory is a cleansing. but apologies if i’m missing your point. my quote that you responded to was in reply to tom.
A
Amandil
Guest
Purgatory is not for the forgiveness of sins, especially mortal sins. With venial sins they are not sufficient to destroy divine life in the soul although they do wound it.
The pains of purgatory are for the remediation of sins committed and the final removal of those habits which cause us to sin so as to be made “perfect” before entering eternal beatitude.
B
bisco
Guest
thank you. i feel we are off track here with the o/p’s question.
A
Amandil
Guest
Somewhat.
I’m rather surprised at the amount of professed Catholics expressing such personal incredulity in regards to something expressly taught by our Savior.
Tom likes to accuse others who side with Orthodoxy as “putting God in a box” when it seems rather that is precisely what he himself is doing, basing his entire argument upon a literalistic misinterpretation of 1 Timothy.
Anyone with common sense could reconcile the difference between that God “wills(desires) all men to be saved”, the fact that the Savior says that “many” will refuse salvation and thus wind up in hell, and that how the Scripture is not contradicted by that fact.
Tom instead chooses to make absolute one verse ripped out of context, forms and entire theory based upon that one verse, and uses that theory as an interpretive key to interpret the whole of Scripture at the expense of the rest of Scripture itself and Sacred Tradition.
Coming form the perspective of a parent, a parent of children with their own free wills, it’s neither difficult for me to conceive of a scenario where my attempts to love my children, when they have in fact chosen to have nothing to do with me, in fact becomes for them a source of torment.
How often have we noticed when a young child is having a temper tantrum because they are not getting that toy they want. I just noticed tonight this child losing it in the grocery store because his mother wasn’t getting the doughnut which he was pointing to. Every attempt by her to pick the right doughnut out of the case was met with even louder crying and screaming from the child. She was simply trying to give the child what he wanted yet he was acting as if every attempt she made at pleasing him was an excruciating torment. And when she picked him up out of the cart, to try and show more love and patience by taking him to the doughnut case for him to point to the exact doughnut he wanted, he only got louder and I think he pinched or scratched her. “Get away” he screamed.
I pitied the mother and her son both, she was apologizing profusely, I told her not to worry.
The way I see it we’re really no different than that child before God. And some of us could really care less about God or His love and instead would really love nothing more than for us to get our doughnut.
I simply don’t know who in their right mind would think that the reality of hell would be less real than the above example instead of more. When a person tells God, like the Prodigal Son tells his father, “You’re dead to me, give me my due inheritance and I’ll be on my way…”(Luke 15:12, see Sirach 33:23-24). If the father in that story is meant to be like God the Father, then God will in fact give us exactly what we want, “to squander it in a life of loose living.” Scripture in no way makes it unclear as to the son’s state when he has squandered his life, he is “dead”. If he had never gone back and asked for forgiveness from his father, he would have remained “dead” and “lost”.
Yes, the story is essentially about the Father and His openness to receive His lost children, but it should not be overlooked that those who refuse to come back to the Father but instead remain impenitent in their pridefulness are in fact committing the “unforgiveable sin”. They are “lost” and “dead”.
B
bisco
Guest
well said, and just for clarity, this is before physical death, yes?
S
simpleas
Guest
Yeah, I don’t think God would hold a person to a teaching they never knew about, but many people do hear of christianity and don’t bother to find out about it. Us on the other hand do know, and we try to remain obedient, but we fall, then we get up, but if we fall again without repenting, God will toss us into the fires of hell? No, I think not, like you said God Judges us by what we understand and our faith in him.
I don’t understand separation from God, I try my best in my life, and I hope this is enough for God.
B
bisco
Guest
if we fall without repenting, they may be a problem. God judges our heart’s. repenting would be feeling sorrow and great sadness that we fell again. if we didn’t feel that and then died, that could be problematic. again though, nothing to do with being in hell and getting out somewhere down the road.
R
Rodb
Guest
Hi Amandil. I read one of the verses in your post used to argue for original sin and then read a little further on in 1 Cor.
" For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"
29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them.
Seems to be saying that everyone will be made alive in Christ, as there is a direct correlation between the all in the first part of the verse who die, and the all in the second part who will be made alive in Christ. The second verse seems to indicate that the early Church entertained hope for the dead to be saved, else why “be baptized” for them.
Regards, Rodb
" For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"
29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them.
Seems to be saying that everyone will be made alive in Christ, as there is a direct correlation between the all in the first part of the verse who die, and the all in the second part who will be made alive in Christ. The second verse seems to indicate that the early Church entertained hope for the dead to be saved, else why “be baptized” for them.
Regards, Rodb
R
Rodb
Guest
Hi Amandil. I read one of the verses in your post used to argue for original sin and then read a little further on in 1 Cor.
" For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"
29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them.
Seems to be saying that everyone will be made alive in Christ, as there is a direct correlation between the all in the first part of the verse who die, and the all in the second part who will be made alive in Christ. The second verse seems to indicate that the early Church entertained hope for the dead to be saved, else why “be baptized” for them.
Regards, Rodb
" For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"
29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them.
Seems to be saying that everyone will be made alive in Christ, as there is a direct correlation between the all in the first part of the verse who die, and the all in the second part who will be made alive in Christ. The second verse seems to indicate that the early Church entertained hope for the dead to be saved, else why “be baptized” for them.
Regards, Rodb
B
bisco
Guest
are you talking about people already in hell?
A
Amandil
Guest
You’re reading into the verse.
The ancient near-east maintained the idea that we all lived within(or in) our ancestors and that what they did they did in our name. When they were righteous(such as Abraham) their righteousness thus affected all of their descendants.
See Heb 7:1-10. In verses 9 & 10 Paul explicitly states that Levi(as a priest of God) “paid tithes through Abraham(to Melchizedek) for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him.”
The same principle applies with Adam and original sin. All humanity was in Adam’s loins when Adam made covenant with God “to till and to keep” the garden(the words ‘to till and to keep’ being synonymous with ‘to guard and to protect’; these are actions of a priestly nature).
Thus all humanity sinned with Adam when He sinned. This is the Original Sin, which all humanity was under the dominion of until Christ came.
To address your second point, in 1 Corinthians 15 Paul is addressing the resurrection of the dead, not the salvation of everyone. He first reiterates the principle of Original Sin(death reigning in Adam) and that it is only from being “in Christ”(being in in covenant in Christ’s Body-the Church-by grace and through faith). The “all” when Paul writes “in Christ shall all be made alive” specifically refers to those who are “in Christ”-those who are a part of His Body, those who have been Baptized into His death, and who abide in Him through the reception of HIs Body and Blood in the Eucharist.
On the Last Day everyone will be raised from the dead, their souls will be rejoined with their bodies. Then comes the Judgment.
Those who are in Christ and are perfected in virtue will be granted entrance into beatitude. Those who refused Christ will receive “the resurrection of judgment” and eternity in hell.
It is not an affirmation of universal salvation.
A
arte
Guest
Hi Glenda
Many thanks for making a précis of my post because I will only have to answer your post and not all the others that may have replied. Unfortunately, because you have cut down my reply and not included the quotes by Amandil that I was answering, some of my statements look out of context. I have no problems with that because it is difficult to précis something and retain all the salient points. I have moved the following sentence from your post to your first paragraph as it fits in better for my reply: “You’re calling God immoral. THAT IS CURSING GOD, which is a blasphemy”.
I must qualify a few things before I answer your post. I was a bit annoyed at Amandil’s curt (bordering on disrespectful) replies to not just my posts but others on this forum. I am also annoyed at the remarks made by Amandil and others on this forum about people (souls) in hell. You would think by reading these remarks that the occupants of hell are the worst degenerates of mankind. If you believe in hell, these worst degenerates of mankind are a small minority of the total occupants of hell. There is no compassion shown in these remarks for the occupants of hell. I find that very disturbing coming from Christians.
I have written many times on this forum about the proportion of people who are destined for hell. I believe I only had a couple of replies doubting my proportion. All were answered without replies by using “who is eligible to go to heaven” instead of “who is destined for hell”. Using the former and not the latter, produces a more accurate estimate of the proportion of mankind destined for hell And, if you also use scripture and Church teaching on the latter, the estimate of the proportion of mankind destined for hell becomes even more accurate. The best case scenario, using the above logic, is that a majority of mankind is destined for hell.
Other people on this forum have also said that only a few will be saved but you didn’t question them. The following Bible quote has been used to substantiate this: Matthew 7:13-14: Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and ONLY A FEW will find it. So, both I and some other people on this forum are not despairing of God’s saving graces poured out upon the Cross. We are stating the truth as shown in Holy Scripture.
From all of the above, I was a bit angry when I wrote my post. Christians should not get angry so I have asked forgiveness for that and anything that I wrote which may be construed as blasphemous.
OK, I am now ready to reply to your post. Because I do not believe in hell or original sin, Amandil’s post below ratcheted up my anger.
Given that I am not a panentheist, and that neither do I hold that God is influenced or affected by the universe or is in any way identical with the universe, that God is immutable, that God in fact created the universe ex nihilo, that His very act of creating is utterly gratuitous, and as a matter of fact so is His act of saving souls since every human created in in fact deserving of the eternity of hell based upon the Original Sin,
How is it utterly gratuitous of God to create us knowing in advance that the MAJORITY (best case scenario) of us will end up in hell and in fact ALL OF US (100%) DESERVE to end up in hell because of original sin? Surely, Amandil’s statement is not correct in that we all deserve hell because of original sin. Original sin cannot send you to hell or am I wrong? I will explore original sin and limbo later. From Amandil’s post and my sentences above, how is it moral for God to create us? If you believe in hell and that original sin can send you there, wouldn’t it be more gratuitous and moral for God not to create us? I am not cursing God by saying this and I do not believe I am being blasphemous. I am merely asking a straight forward question because I have never heard that original sin can send you to hell. If original sin cannot send you to hell, isn’t Amandil’s post: “Another major fault, that of utterly judging all of mankind and despairing of God’s saving graces poured out upon the Cross” – your words”.
I do not believe in hell or original sin, so for me GOD IS BEING UTTERLY GRATUITOUS AND MORAL in creating us.
Whilst I do not believe in original sin, I firmly believe in the Sacrament of Baptism. My baptism was a very important sacrament to initiate me into the Catholic Church – Christianity. By having their children baptised, parents are responsible for raising their children as Christians. God parents attend baptism because if anything happens to the biological parents, the God parents are responsible for raising the child as a Christian. This is exactly what happened to me. My mother died when I was young and my God mother who was a very devout Catholic raised me as a Catholic Christian. She made sure that I attended Mass on Sunday and went to confession regularly. I am forever indebted to her.
Cont’d
A
arte
Guest
Cont’d
By “babies dying early”, do you mean abortion? Unless there are very serious medical reasons concerning the baby or the mother, I have a BIG NO on abortion. It’s tantamount to murder.
“Spared this horrible life, right” - what a terrible remark to make. When I try to evangelise, people often say: If God wants us all to go to Heaven, why not just put us there NOW? Or, they mention all the suffering in the World. I tell them that all the suffering is just nature. God put us here for a reason. That reason is to experience this life with all its ups and downs. God even put himself on Earth as a human being so you would see that He had experienced this life. He also died a horrific death for us. My own take on it: Before we go to Heaven, a part of the journey there is to live in this imperfect universe. Our enjoyment in Heaven is made all the more complete by experiencing this imperfect life.
“People find it increasingly difficult to accept that GOD IS JUST AND MERCIFUL if he excludes infants, who have no personal sins, from eternal happiness, whether they are Christian or non-Christian.”
“The study was made in part because of the pressing pastoral needs caused by the increase in the numbers of abortions and the growing number of children who die before being baptized”. Words such as “practical and pastoral perspective” and “pastoral priority in the modern era” are also included in the Report. I can only assume this indicates that Catholic lay people are pushing their Parish Priests for reform in this area because they can no longer accept that non baptised babies go to Limbo.
“The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to HOPE that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness, even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in Revelation. However, none of the considerations proposed in this text to motivate a new approach to the question may be used to negate the necessity of baptism, nor to delay the conferral of the sacrament”
As I do not believe in original sin, my baptism did not wash original sin away because there was no sin to wash away.
I did not say “that we are descended from apes”. I said “that we were descended from an ape like creature”. This is a very important distinction when discussing the Theory of Evolution. The “get over it” remark was my anger at the revolting comment by Amandil that we should be grateful that God didn’t put us all in hell because of original sin.
Cont’d
NO, YOU ARE COMPLETELY WRONG. People choose contraception in order to have fewer children. We were a Catholic family of 10, my mother and father and 8 children. You don’t see many families that large these days. I am a returned Catholic and I attended a course for returned Catholics. I was amazed to see how much change there was in the Church since I had left. One change was lay people having more say in the running of the Church. I remarked on this to the female instructor and she said lay Catholics were now pushing reform from the bottom – up. One such push was the contraceptive pill. She said that most married Catholic women were taking the pill. I have since heard it being called a “Vatican Bypass”. I have no problem with Catholics using contraception.
By “babies dying early”, do you mean abortion? Unless there are very serious medical reasons concerning the baby or the mother, I have a BIG NO on abortion. It’s tantamount to murder.
“Spared this horrible life, right” - what a terrible remark to make. When I try to evangelise, people often say: If God wants us all to go to Heaven, why not just put us there NOW? Or, they mention all the suffering in the World. I tell them that all the suffering is just nature. God put us here for a reason. That reason is to experience this life with all its ups and downs. God even put himself on Earth as a human being so you would see that He had experienced this life. He also died a horrific death for us. My own take on it: Before we go to Heaven, a part of the journey there is to live in this imperfect universe. Our enjoyment in Heaven is made all the more complete by experiencing this imperfect life.
I did not say: “Christianity’s beliefs are ridiculous”. I said that “Christianity’s belief in original sin is ridiculous”. How can a baby be born with sin on its soul? My main concern when I wrote this was that babies who were not baptised could not go to Heaven - they went to Limbo. Can you imagine the amount of grief that parents suffer when they loose a baby? This happened to my best friend so I saw the grief first hand. If the parents are practising Catholics, that grief is compounded by the fact that even if they go to Heaven, they believe that they will never see their baby again because their baby is in Limbo. DOES OUR CHURCH STILL BELIEVE IN LIMBO? I did a lot of research on the subject (that’s why this post is late) including research into other Christian religions. In some websites it stated: “The Catholic Church no longer believes in Limbo and that Pope Benedict XVI had declared this”. I did not find evidence for this on any Catholic website. I found this through the Vatican’s Catechism website: The Church held an International Theological Commission on 19 January 2007 to discuss the hope of salvation for infants who die without being baptised. Pope Benedict XVI approved the report. I quote from the Commission’s Report:
“People find it increasingly difficult to accept that GOD IS JUST AND MERCIFUL if he excludes infants, who have no personal sins, from eternal happiness, whether they are Christian or non-Christian.”
“The study was made in part because of the pressing pastoral needs caused by the increase in the numbers of abortions and the growing number of children who die before being baptized”. Words such as “practical and pastoral perspective” and “pastoral priority in the modern era” are also included in the Report. I can only assume this indicates that Catholic lay people are pushing their Parish Priests for reform in this area because they can no longer accept that non baptised babies go to Limbo.
“The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to HOPE that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness, even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in Revelation. However, none of the considerations proposed in this text to motivate a new approach to the question may be used to negate the necessity of baptism, nor to delay the conferral of the sacrament”
As I do not believe in original sin, my baptism did not wash original sin away because there was no sin to wash away.
I did not say “that we are descended from apes”. I said “that we were descended from an ape like creature”. This is a very important distinction when discussing the Theory of Evolution. The “get over it” remark was my anger at the revolting comment by Amandil that we should be grateful that God didn’t put us all in hell because of original sin.
Cont’d
A
arte
Guest
Cont’d
I have addressed the issue of original sin and baptism already. Unfortunately, I am not a young person. I am 63 years old. I fail to see how renouncing original sin will have eternal consequences (I guess you mean hell) for me. I am very grateful for your prayers. I will pray for you also as we all need prayers. You and other members on this forum have often said that my beliefs make me a Protestant or as you put it a “full blown Protestant”. The insinuation in yours and others comments is that Protestants are not worthy Christians and cannot go to Heaven. This is out and out bigotry and is a sin. Our Church tells us to respect other religions including non Christian religions. Protestants are Christians so your lack of respect for them increases your disrespect. In my research on original sin and Limbo, no Protestant or Eastern Orthodox denomination accepts the concept of Limbo. None even offers it as a possibility. They believe that the souls of babies, who die before baptism, are immediately translated to the presence of God. Therefore, in this very important area of Church doctrine, we Catholics are well behind the Protestants and have been for a long time.
With the exception of two Catholic beliefs namely Limbo and the use of contraception, my disbeliefs are general to most denominations of Christianity. I do not believe in:
- Hell.
- The Genesis account for the creation of the Universe and Earth.
- Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden
- Original Sin especially where "it infects” every human throughout time.
- Limbo
- Noah’s Ark and the Flood.
- Any passage in the Old Testament where God supposedly helps or condones the murder of men, women and children, rape, forced marriages, and pillage.
- The fear of God.
- That God gets angry, wrathful, or jealous.
- That the devil is a fallen archangel and his demons are fallen angels. I do believe in the devil and that he tries his best to lead us astray and do evil acts. My Parish Priest said that humans can do any manner of evil because it is innate inside us. This is likely the case but I also believe in an exterior evil entity – the devil.
- A ban on contraception.
- Status