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

[simpleas]

Many thanks Simpleas for your reply. I’ve often visited old graveyards and sometimes with my wife when we were on holiday. I know it sounds macabre but it’s amazing the history you can see from reading the engraving on the tomb stones. It somehow connects you with that time period.

The story about the child being buried on its own and not with the rest of the family is heart wrenching. You saw there a typical example of where religion with its all its scripture, dogma and teachings cannot make a common sense decision about the fate of an innocent child. I am 100% certain that that child is in Heaven with its family. God would have it no other way. Do you live in the UK because the description you give of the 17 Century village graveyard sounds typical of a graveyard in the UK (possibly England)?

I had forgotten about the Prayer of Exorcism and Anointing before Baptism so many thanks for including that as well. It’s been many years since I’ve been to a Baptism (Christening).

Hey Arte,
Just to correct, the child was in the family grave, but had the words written under the name to tell that he was not baptised before death, bless him, I do believe he would be with is family now too.

Yes I’m in the UK, and it was a Church of England grave yard, and I share with you that walking among a grave yard 200 years old can send you back in time, the old style of writing and the beautiful poetry that can be found on the old tombs and head stones.

Our parish seems to be baptising a child every other week at the moment!

 

[arte]

QUOTE=Amandil;12352852]At least you refer to it as a “theory”.
The theory of evolution follows the fallacy of confusing similarity with descent, its a kind of cum hoc(false correlation) fallacy…
This and your reply below: “canonized what you yourself explicitly call a “theory” shows that you have absolutely no understanding of science and an even less understanding of Evolution. If you were to say to a scientist that “it’s only a theory”, the scientist would look at you “as if you had 2 heads”. Non scientific people think that theories are just educated guesses or hunches. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. They are the pinnacles of science – the top rung on a ladder of science.

Scientific theories are even superior to scientific laws. To put it in the most simplest of terms, a theory explains the “how” and “why” something happens whereas a law is a readily observable fact “about something”. To be more exact, a theory must be proved under a variety of conditions in experiments. It must be able to successfully make predictions of how a phenomenon will behave. This is exactly the case with the Theory of Evolution. Scientists have repeatedly found transitional fossils of a type exactly matching what the Theory of Evolution predicted and in the time period in which the Theory of Evolution predicted they would find them. Transitional fossils are very important because they provide information about a transition from one species to another.

Evolution is happening right now under microscopes in medical laboratories. Antibiotics were the “holy grail” of medicine when invented in 1928 by Alexander Fleming. Doctors gave them out like sweets. Unfortunately, the bacteria have EVOLVED and are now very resistant to antibiotics.

To call evolution a fallacy is to DENY THE REAL TRUTH.
Whether you like it or not, you and every other human being that has lived on this planet are descendants of an ape like creature.

The only “sound argument” you provided is based upon your personal subjective belief that it is “ridiculous”. No real reasons as to why.

I will answer this later.

I have no idea where you even get your “definitions” since you didn’t even bother to cite it.
Incredulity simply means: a feeling that you do not or cannot believe or accept that something is true or real.

I have an old large Oxford Dictionary published by Oxford University Press, England. This dictionary is highly acclaimed and isn’t the best spoken English; Oxford English? Mine is “dog eared” from its constant use not just by me but more so by my fellow executive managers when I was working. However, these days, I normally use several on line dictionaries and try to find one which gives a religious meaning to a word. This is a religious debate and by doing this, I’m giving you more ammunition to shoot me. Hence, my definition of incredulity being: religious disbelief, lack of faith. From my Oxford Dictionary: incredulity – unbelieving, showing disbelief. My religious meaning was very close to the meaning of “incredulity” in my Oxford Dictionary. However, I’ll use your Merriam Webster meaning against your disbelief in evolution: ****a feeling that you do not or cannot believe or accept that something is true or real. ****

I find it quite remarkable that you have basically canonized what you yourself explicitly call a “theory”, while in the same breath you demythologize, if not outright trash, the Word of God in the Scriptures which the Church, the Church you profess to believe in at every Mass, says are “inspired and inerrant”(which you also reject).

I have already covered the “theory” part of the above reply. Some Christian organisations attempt to refute the theory of evolution by using deceit. Basically, they lie which is utterly disgraceful for a Christian to do. These Christian organisations put out to the lay community that there are hundreds of scientists who do not believe in the theory of evolution and there is great debate on the validity of the theory of evolution within the scientific community. This is completely false. There is no debate going on in the scientific community on the validity of the theory of evolution.

Religious deniers of evolution believed in Creationism and when that didn’t work, Intelligent Design was used. I was a great advocate for Intelligent Design when I rejected the Theory of Evolution until my scientific roots pulled me back to the real truth. Intelligent Design didn’t work so then Creation Science was put forward. Creation Science is pseudoscience and at its very best can only provide a hypothesis. When the hypothesis is easily knocked down, the fall back is: “it’s in the Bible so it must be true”. The writers of Genesis in the Bible were attempting to describe the creation of the universe, our planet and humanity without any scientific knowledge. They did their best with the knowledge available at the time.

CONT’D

 

[arte]

At least you refer to it as a “theory”.

The theory of evolution follows the fallacy of confusing similarity with descent, its a kind of cum hoc(false correlation) fallacy.

This and your reply below: “canonized what you yourself explicitly call a “theory” shows that you have absolutely no understanding of science and an even less understanding of Evolution. If you were to say to a scientist that “it’s only a theory”, the scientist would look at you “as if you had 2 heads”. Non scientific people think that theories are just educated guesses or hunches. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. They are the pinnacles of science – the top rung on a ladder of science.

Scientific theories are even superior to scientific laws. To put it in the most simplest of terms, a theory explains the “how” and “why” something happens whereas a law is a readily observable fact “about something”. To be more exact, a theory must be proved under a variety of conditions in experiments. It must be able to successfully make predictions of how a phenomenon will behave. This is exactly the case with the Theory of Evolution. Scientists have repeatedly found transitional fossils of a type exactly matching what the Theory of Evolution predicted and in the time period in which the Theory of Evolution predicted they would find them. Transitional fossils are very important because they provide information about a transition from one species to another.

Evolution is happening right now under microscopes in medical laboratories. Antibiotics were the “holy grail” of medicine when invented in 1928 by Alexander Fleming. Doctors gave them out like sweets. Unfortunately, the bacteria have EVOLVED and are now very resistant to antibiotics.

To call evolution a fallacy is to DENY THE REAL TRUTH.
Whether you like it or not, you and every other human being that has lived on this planet are descendants of an ape like creature.

The only “sound argument” you provided is based upon your personal subjective belief that it is “ridiculous”. No real reasons as to why.

I will answer this later.

I have no idea where you even get your “definitions” since you didn’t even bother to cite it.

Incredulity simply means: a feeling that you do not or cannot believe or accept that something is true or real.

I have an old large Oxford Dictionary published by Oxford University Press, England. This dictionary is highly acclaimed and isn’t the best spoken English; Oxford English? Mine is “dog eared” from its constant use not just by me but more so by my fellow executive managers when I was working. However, these days, I normally use several on line dictionaries and try to find one which gives a religious meaning to a word. This is a religious debate and by doing this, I’m giving you more ammunition to shoot me. Hence, my definition of incredulity being: religious disbelief, lack of faith. From my Oxford Dictionary: incredulity – unbelieving, showing disbelief. My religious meaning was very close to the meaning of “incredulity” in my Oxford Dictionary. However, I’ll use your Merriam Webster meaning against your disbelief in evolution: ****a feeling that you do not or cannot believe or accept that something is true or real. ****

I find it quite remarkable that you have basically canonized what you yourself explicitly call a “theory”, while in the same breath you demythologize, if not outright trash, the Word of God in the Scriptures which the Church, the Church you profess to believe in at every Mass, says are “inspired and inerrant”(which you also reject).

I have already covered the “theory” part of the above reply. Some Christian organisations attempt to refute the theory of evolution by using deceit. Basically, they lie which is utterly disgraceful for a Christian to do. These Christian organisations put out to the lay community that there are hundreds of scientists who do not believe in the theory of evolution and there is great debate on the validity of the theory of evolution within the scientific community. This is completely false. There is no debate going on in the scientific community on the validity of the theory of evolution.

Religious deniers of evolution believed in Creationism and when that didn’t work, Intelligent Design was used. I was a great advocate for Intelligent Design when I rejected the Theory of Evolution until my scientific roots pulled me back to the real truth. Intelligent Design didn’t work so then Creation Science was put forward. Creation Science is pseudoscience and at its very best can only provide a hypothesis. When the hypothesis is easily knocked down, the fall back is: “it’s in the Bible so it must be true”. The writers of Genesis in the Bible were attempting to describe the creation of the universe, our planet and humanity without any scientific knowledge. They did their best with the knowledge available at the time.

CONT’D

 

[arte]

CONT’D

PLEASE IGNORE POST#917. I have contacted the Administrator to have it removed. The “quote” function did not work correctly.

Setting aside even what Paul wrote in Romans 5(which you seemed to ignore and refused to address).

I have rearranged your reply to answer Romans 5. I vividly remember as an 8 year old child being taught in Catholic school that Jesus died to open the gates of Heaven which had been closed for a long time because of Adam’s original sin. I completely accepted it then and I believe that the above teaching is essentially what Romans 5 covers. However, I’ll still give a very short précis of Romans 5: Because of Adam’s one sin, all mankind became “enemies of God” and Christ’s sacrifice “put us right” with God leading us to eternal life through Jesus Christ. I try really hard but I find it extremely difficult to accept that one man’s sin causes all of the above to happen. Is God so “hard nosed” that He condemns the whole human race to live with suffering and death for ever because of one man’s sin?

The level of ignorance of reality this displays is remarkable as well.
There are obvious examples of everyday life:

1)Original Sin is supremely self-evident in the fact that we all die.
2)Original Sin is evident in the fact that every one does sin. No one who has ever lived(save for Christ Who is God and the BVM by a singular act of grace from God) has ever loved perfectly so as to never sin.
3)If sin is selfishness, then yes, even infants and toddlers have demonstrated Original Sin in their tendency to possess and dominate through self-will(as when they hoard toys or lie to stay out of trouble).

1. The only ignorance of reality is coming from you. The reason why we all die is self evident because the whole Universe is not perfect – EVERYTHING DIES IN OUR UNIVERSE. The age of the universe is: 13.798±0.037 billion years. The age of the Earth is: 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years. This blows out the 6 days of creation in Genesis. Planets die, stars die and galaxies crash into each other so it is obvious to me why we die as well. With our knowledge of the Big Bang, the creation of the universe and the evolution of mankind, it proves that our universe and us WERE NEVER PERFECT – everything dies including us.

I can rationalise why God created this imperfect universe because I believe we need to “experience” this imperfect life in order to fully understand our eternal life in Heaven.

1. Sinning is a part of human nature, wired into our very being through evolution. The only way to mitigate sin is to use Jesus as our moral compass and actually try our best to emulate Him. Before we sin, we should always think: what would Jesus do in this situation?
2. Infants and toddlers do not sin. If they die, their souls are “whiter” than a saint’s soul. Yes, infants and toddlers can be naughty but with a parent’s loving guidance, they learn how to behave appropriately. This still doesn’t prevent them being naughty again. I’m a bit concerned that you keep bringing negative comments about infants and toddlers into discussions about sin and/or hell. Just out of interest: Do you have any children?

No, now you’re committing an ad-hominum, attacking me and my supposed “lack of empathy”.

You clearly have nothing beneficial or anything of substance to add, so for your sake I’ll end the discussion here.

I can only assume from your replies especially in the above sentence that you are a young person because you get a bit hostile when you’re caught out.

 

[nhacchuong2014]

Maybe a lot of people will not understand what you say, but I think it’s all think about how hard one, please help us to overcome all difficulties

 

[glendab]

Hello Arte.

CONT’D

PLEASE IGNORE POST#917. I have contacted the Administrator to have it removed. The “quote” function did not work correctly.

I have rearranged your reply to answer Romans 5. I vividly remember as an 8 year old child being taught in Catholic school that Jesus died to open the gates of Heaven which had been closed for a long time because of Adam’s original sin. I completely accepted it then and I believe that the above teaching is essentially what Romans 5 covers. However, I’ll still give a very short précis of Romans 5: Because of Adam’s one sin, all mankind became “enemies of God” and Christ’s sacrifice “put us right” with God leading us to eternal life through Jesus Christ. I try really hard but I find it extremely difficult to accept that one man’s sin causes all of the above to happen. Is God so “hard nosed” that He condemns the whole human race to live with suffering and death for ever because of one man’s sin?

1. The only ignorance of reality is coming from you. The reason why we all die is self evident because the whole Universe is not perfect – EVERYTHING DIES IN OUR UNIVERSE. The age of the universe is: 13.798±0.037 billion years. The age of the Earth is: 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years. This blows out the 6 days of creation in Genesis. Planets die, stars die and galaxies crash into each other so it is obvious to me why we die as well. With our knowledge of the Big Bang, the creation of the universe and the evolution of mankind, it proves that our universe and us WERE NEVER PERFECT – everything dies including us.

I can rationalise why God created this imperfect universe because I believe we need to “experience” this imperfect life in order to fully understand our eternal life in Heaven.

1. Sinning is a part of human nature, wired into our very being through evolution. The only way to mitigate sin is to use Jesus as our moral compass and actually try our best to emulate Him. Before we sin, we should always think: what would Jesus do in this situation?
2. Infants and toddlers do not sin. If they die, their souls are “whiter” than a saint’s soul. Yes, infants and toddlers can be naughty but with a parent’s loving guidance, they learn how to behave appropriately. This still doesn’t prevent them being naughty again. I’m a bit concerned that you keep bringing negative comments about infants and toddlers into discussions about sin and/or hell. Just out of interest: Do you have any children?

I can only assume from your replies especially in the above sentence that you are a young person because you get a bit hostile when you’re caught out.

A few little questions: How did you say “Amen” yesterday after reciting the Creed at Mass if you don’t really believe all the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches? Did you go up for Communion? Why if you aren’t in communion with the Church on some basic things, evolution, original sin, etc.? If your answer is “yes” to those three questions, can you explain how you can call other Christians “liars” and present yourself for Communion yet aren’t really accepting of what is necessary to receive worthily? Whose the liar now? Only your lie is a big one. When you say Amen in Church after reciting the Creed, you are in effect, swearing to God publically that you believe all things that the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches and you are giving your assent to those things in front of everyone there. We are each others witnesses in this and the Priest is receiving this oath on behalf of the whole Church. This is why it is obligatory for us to recite the Creed on Sundays and why it happens before the Eucharistic prayers. This is something you learn when you go to RCIA. You aren’t allowed to say the Creed in public for that very reason, because until you can give your assent and swear to God that you believe, you are dismissed from witnessing the Eucharistic parts of the Mass. I went thru RCIA and until you are considered worthy you get dismissed. You are given a copy of the Creed formally and it means you are now not only worthy to receive the Blessed Sacrament, but that you can actually swear to God in Mass that you believe all the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches. It means those instructing you are also sure that you DO believe for they too are bound by oath before God. Otherwise you are committing a mortal sin. You will be also committing sacrilege to receive Communion unworthily because you don’t believe some things.

So, that said Arte, can you explain your positions and your reception of the Eucharist and the Creed you read at Church?

Glenda

 

[OneSheep]

Hello Arte.

A few little questions: How did you say “Amen” yesterday after reciting the Creed at Mass if you don’t really believe all the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches? Did you go up for Communion? Why if you aren’t in communion with the Church on some basic things, evolution, original sin, etc.? If your answer is “yes” to those three questions, can you explain how you can call other Christians “liars” and present yourself for Communion yet aren’t really accepting of what is necessary to receive worthily? Whose the liar now? Only your lie is a big one. When you say Amen in Church after reciting the Creed, you are in effect, swearing to God publically that you believe all things that the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches and you are giving your assent to those things in front of everyone there. We are each others witnesses in this and the Priest is receiving this oath on behalf of the whole Church. This is why it is obligatory for us to recite the Creed on Sundays and why it happens before the Eucharistic prayers. This is something you learn when you go to RCIA. You aren’t allowed to say the Creed in public for that very reason, because until you can give your assent and swear to God that you believe, you are dismissed from witnessing the Eucharistic parts of the Mass. I went thru RCIA and until you are considered worthy you get dismissed. You are given a copy of the Creed formally and it means you are now not only worthy to receive the Blessed Sacrament, but that you can actually swear to God in Mass that you believe all the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches. It means those instructing you are also sure that you DO believe for they too are bound by oath before God. Otherwise you are committing a mortal sin. You will be also committing sacrilege to receive Communion unworthily because you don’t believe some things.

So, that said Arte, can you explain your positions and your reception of the Eucharist and the Creed you read at Church?

Glenda

Whew, Glenda!

Did you read the creed to be a document of exclusion, or inclusion? I have not been following this thread lately, but I had time to do so today.

We are one body, Glenda. Do you know the song? I think that the question should first not be “does the Church exclude”, but “Do I exclude?”

Am I excluding those people from my community who have different opinions?
Am I excluding those people from my community who see evolution in different ways?
Am I excluding those people from my community who sin?
Am I excluding those people from my community who say or believe wrongly?

Are you saying that your RCIA teacher would find these to be less pertinent questions?

Did Arte call some people liars, Glenda? If that is the case, then I understand your possible resentment. But if that is the case, can you forgive him?

What I like about this thread, and the other, is their most basic question. This thread asks, “What is God’s nature?”, and the other thread asks, “What is man’s nature?”

Why don’t we get things back on track here? Is God one who exacts eternal punishment in the first place? Some say yes, some say no. Can we include all of those opinions in our community? Yes. Can we come to the point of understanding the point of view opposite our own? That is what this thread should be about, I think.

May God bless you, Glenda, I hope you are well. I most certainly do not exclude you from my Church, in spite of your feistiness!

 

[nownzen]

From the CCC:

*1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs. *

The Catechism does not equivocate. Nor does the Bible.

Nor does Jesus Christ:

“Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into
the **eternal fire **which has been prepared for the devil and his angels.” Matthew 25:41

If hell were not eternal, there would be no reason to strive for heaven, since we will all get there eventually anyway. It is a comforting thought, but certainly not a sure bet.

You think 1 thousand, 10 thousand years, hell 1 million years of misery in a temporary hell would be like a walk in the park. By the same token, why try and be a law-abiding citizen, after all, with most crimes, you eventually come out of prison? Going to prison, even for 6 months, I assume, is extremely high on the list of things people are extremely motivated to avoid. If this is your only rationale for hell, i’m afraid it’s unfounded.

Moreover, God does not do anyone a favour by “sending” them to hell, as if being in his presence would be so bad that hell becomes God’s safe haven for people who can,t stand him. The reality is that God determined what are the conditons to be eternally damned, the minimum condiiton being one mortal sin, and that hell serves no other purpose than for God’s justice to be satisfied. Hell exists not out of compassion for the damned, its sole purpose is God’s justice. The best-case scenario would have been Heaven as the prize for being good, and temporary punishment and then annihilation for the rest of us. It sucks to only exist to glorify God’s justice, though.

 

[Tom_Baum]

It sure does seem at times that some of the ones who seem to know the most about “religious rules and regulations” have quite a horrific view of God’s Justice.

This “view” sure makes some of the “blood sucking views” of human justice seem to be lenient to the point of absurdity.

One of the things about some people’s “conception” of heaven is that there will be quite a bit of room to do many things since there will not be that many to take up a lot of space.

It simply amazes me that some can have such a horrible, horrible conception of God and yet use such wonderful adjectives to describe God.

I hope, pray, beg and beseech God to do what some say is impossible for God to do, if God is even remotely like what some believe God To Be, and that is to completely destroy me, to unexist me.

 

[Estel]

To get back to the original question, doesn’t Jesus tell us that anything is possible with God? Therefore I would think it is possible that God can relent. Just my two cents. And I will likely read replies, but not going back and forth again

 

[glendab]

Hello OneSheep.

Whew, Glenda!

Did you read the creed to be a document of exclusion, or inclusion? I have not been following this thread lately, but I had time to do so today.

We are one body, Glenda. Do you know the song? I think that the question should first not be “does the Church exclude”, but “Do I exclude?”

Am I excluding those people from my community who have different opinions?
Am I excluding those people from my community who see evolution in different ways?
Am I excluding those people from my community who sin?
Am I excluding those people from my community who say or believe wrongly?

Are you saying that your RCIA teacher would find these to be less pertinent questions?

Did Arte call some people liars, Glenda? If that is the case, then I understand your possible resentment. But if that is the case, can you forgive him?

What I like about this thread, and the other, is their most basic question. This thread asks, “What is God’s nature?”, and the other thread asks, “What is man’s nature?”

Why don’t we get things back on track here? Is God one who exacts eternal punishment in the first place? Some say yes, some say no. Can we include all of those opinions in our community? Yes. Can we come to the point of understanding the point of view opposite our own? That is what this thread should be about, I think.

May God bless you, Glenda, I hope you are well. I most certainly do not exclude you from my Church, in spite of your feistiness!

Nice to have you back. The community of Israel was exclusive of many. People could be kicked out, shunned, etc. I remember this happening to someone in my Grandmother’s family - she was a Kosher Jew who Uncle by blood was a Rabbi. The had a funeral after the family member got chucked! Literally. A funeral. And it wasn’t a happy event at all, it an entirely different tone and purpose then an actual funeral. But I was too young to understand. But the person was from that hour dead! It happens. We know this among us as excommunication. People exclude themselves. The Church simply acknowledges it. And the ultimate hope of the Church that applies excommunication is that this will wake the sinner up to their sad state and give them incentive to repent and return. Check history. For some it did the trick. For some it didn’t.

When I read the Creed I usually thank God under my breath for the gift of faith for I lived a long time without Him in my life and had no faith and when I turned to Him and became a Catholic, I saw how sickened I was in my soul by my bad choices and un-beliefs. Sin has consequences and so does closing one’s heart to God for an opinion. The Church’s teaching isn’t a collection of popular opinions about all things theological. It has a message that had been revealed to her by God about God and she has been entrusted with this most precious of treasures to preserve it and hand it one whole and entire without color or distortion of any kind and she goes to great lengths to preserve all of this for the generations to come. When a person enters the Church they are handed this deposit of faith and they should choose to treasure it. Those who deliberately deny articles of faith or refuse to live according the teaching of the Church cannot expect to go to Heaven. There are certain things one must accept in order to receive Communion worthily. If you aren’t worthy you shouldn’t receive. And worthy isn’t a feeling. It is a fact. Like being pregnant, you either are or you aren’t. If you are eventually you will deliver the baby.

And guess what else? Jesus died to give you what you have. The least you could do is take Him at His word and obey the Church. So there! Rant over. Nice to have you “back” OneSheep.

Glenda

P.S. There isn’t a 11th Commandment that says Thou shalt not make anyone feel excluded.

 

[OneSheep]

Hello OneSheep.
Nice to have you back.

Thanks!

The community of Israel was exclusive of many. People could be kicked out, shunned, etc. I remember this happening to someone in my Grandmother’s family - she was a Kosher Jew who Uncle by blood was a Rabbi. The had a funeral after the family member got chucked! Literally. A funeral. And it wasn’t a happy event at all, it an entirely different tone and purpose then an actual funeral. But I was too young to understand. But the person was from that hour dead! It happens.

Fascinating! I have so many questions, but we are already off-topic.

We know this among us as excommunication. People exclude themselves. The Church simply acknowledges it.

I don’t acknowledge it, even if someone in the heirarchy does. Now, I can agree that there is a case to be made for silencing a voice (censure) that goes against teachings. That person has to sell a case, and if the Church is not ready, its not ready. If it is ready, no institution can stop it.

If someone says they are Catholic, has an open mind, believes in Love, says the creed, etc., well, they are Catholic even though the are in the “cafeteria” mode. If I exclude people from my idea of Catholic, guess what? They are not the ones being excluded, I am! I am excluding them from my idea of communion, and lo and behold, the only one excluded is me! Oh, but I am the “right” one, in my little, tiny box, where only those who agree with me can come in and those who disagree, well, its funeral time.

And the ultimate hope of the Church that applies excommunication is that this will wake the sinner up to their sad state and give them incentive to repent and return. Check history. For some it did the trick. For some it didn’t.

When I read the Creed I usually thank God under my breath for the gift of faith for I lived a long time without Him in my life and had no faith and when I turned to Him and became a Catholic, I saw how sickened I was in my soul by my bad choices and un-beliefs. Sin has consequences and so does closing one’s heart to God for an opinion. The Church’s teaching isn’t a collection of popular opinions about all things theological. It has a message that had been revealed to her by God about God and she has been entrusted with this most precious of treasures to preserve it and hand it one whole and entire without color or distortion of any kind and she goes to great lengths to preserve all of this for the generations to come. When a person enters the Church they are handed this deposit of faith and they should choose to treasure it. Those who deliberately deny articles of faith or refuse to live according the teaching of the Church cannot expect to go to Heaven. There are certain things one must accept in order to receive Communion worthily. If you aren’t worthy you shouldn’t receive. And worthy isn’t a feeling. It is a fact. Like being pregnant, you either are or you aren’t. If you are eventually you will deliver the baby.

I understand and appreciate your reverence. Is someone you know “unworthy”, though Glenda? In a sense, we are all either worthy as a whole or unworthy as a whole. To me, all of us are “worthy”. Humans are beautiful creatures, Glenda. Yes, we have an ignorance and blindness problem, but what God created is good, and it is still good. You were worthy when you were taking the wrong path, We can all look back on times when we were blind and ignorant, and shrug our shoulders. It does no good to cling to bad feelings toward the “old” self. In such clinging, we take the joy out of the new!

And guess what else? Jesus died to give you what you have. The least you could do is take Him at His word and obey the Church.

Ah, yes, Jesus died as payment, the Anselmian doctrine. Did I give you Cardinal Ratzinger’s take on that? I have read two books since then, both critical of the doctrine, as was the Cardinal. And now I’m not obeying the Church? Hmmm. Yes, I take Jesus at His word, Glenda, we just hear it a little differently. I hear you, though, I think you are feeling a little disappointed when people see things a bit differently. It’s understandable.

So there! Rant over. Nice to have you “back” OneSheep.

Glenda

P.S. There isn’t a 11th Commandment that says Thou shalt not make anyone feel excluded.

Oop! It’s in there now. The back page of my Bible has all the commandments that have been left out. I’ll put “Thou shalt not give people reason to think that they are excluded” under “Thou shalt not keep people enslaved” and “Thou shalt not assault.”

Really, we cannot “make” anyone feel anything. If I were to say, “Glenda, you make me feel excluded.” I am stating that you are in control of my feelings, which you are not. Indeed, I would be accusing you of something that would be totally my issue, not yours. However, there are words that we use, stereotypes, labels, etc. that trigger people’s feelings of loneliness and feelings of being less accepted in some way. If I have ever triggered any of your feelings in that respect, I sincerely apologize. You see? I think you are a great person, Glenda, and it is nice to have you here. We disagree on stuff, but it doesn’t matter. I wish you could be in our “Arise” group, you would definitely spice it up!

Thanks, Glenda, for your reply. I preach, you rant, its all good.

 

[Aloysium]

God is just and we must trust Him.
If you don’t like what you have heard coming from the church, you should rethink your views.
All that does not agree with what has been revealed and interpreted by the church is nonsense arising from fear, wishful thinking and arrogant human posturing when faced with the mysteries of existence, goodness and evil, life and death.
Have no doubt about it, God is Love.
It is best to focus on Him, becoming more loving persons.

To the people who have come to these Forums to learn about Catholicism, I would recommend you not go by what you read here. It is merely opinion.
You will find that the Catechism of the Catholic Church addresses these matters clearly and concisely. It is an excellent resource for everyone:
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

 

[powerofk]

Hello Arte.

A few little questions: How did you say “Amen” yesterday after reciting the Creed at Mass if you don’t really believe all the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches? Did you go up for Communion? Why if you aren’t in communion with the Church on some basic things, evolution, original sin, etc.? If your answer is “yes” to those three questions, can you explain how you can call other Christians “liars” and present yourself for Communion yet aren’t really accepting of what is necessary to receive worthily? Whose the liar now? Only your lie is a big one. When you say Amen in Church after reciting the Creed, you are in effect, swearing to God publically that you believe all things that the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches and you are giving your assent to those things in front of everyone there. We are each others witnesses in this and the Priest is receiving this oath on behalf of the whole Church. This is why it is obligatory for us to recite the Creed on Sundays and why it happens before the Eucharistic prayers. This is something you learn when you go to RCIA. You aren’t allowed to say the Creed in public for that very reason, because until you can give your assent and swear to God that you believe, you are dismissed from witnessing the Eucharistic parts of the Mass. I went thru RCIA and until you are considered worthy you get dismissed. You are given a copy of the Creed formally and it means you are now not only worthy to receive the Blessed Sacrament, but that you can actually swear to God in Mass that you believe all the Holy Catholic Church believes and teaches. It means those instructing you are also sure that you DO believe for they too are bound by oath before God. Otherwise you are committing a mortal sin. You will be also committing sacrilege to receive Communion unworthily because you don’t believe some things.

So, that said Arte, can you explain your positions and your reception of the Eucharist and the Creed you read at Church?

Glenda

Okay, first of all, the Church does not condemn evolution (St. John Paul II even stated that it was possible). It does, however, condemn evolutionism, and insists that God has an intregal part to play in evolution; and, regardless, even if humans were decended from apes biologically, we have one set of human parents (read: 1 man & 1 woman) that we all decended from who fell from grace. Many of the greatest scientific minds in the world are Dominican friars and Jesuit priests & brothers. St. Albert the Great, a Dominican friar, is the patron saint of natural sciences; Br. Gregor Mendel, the “father” of genetics, was himself a religious brother (though, I don’t know what order; I think he was a Trappist, actually).

Anyway, though, you’re right that when we recite the Creed, we do affirm the beliefs of the Church. Excommunication in the Church is not meant to be permanent, however; it is meant to show the one being excommunicated the extreme seriousness of his/her particular sin by denying him/her fellowship until he/she formally repents to the authority designated to removing the penalty of excommunication (in most cases, this is the local bishop - or the priest deputized by him - though the Holy See has deternined that some excommunications are so grave that only the Holy See can lift the excommunication). Honestly, most laypersons who are excommunicated are excommunicated because they committed sins that incurred automatic excommunication (such as an abortion - and even in this case, the penalty of automatic excommunication must be known ahead of time).

It is actually rather difficult for a layperson to be formally excommunicated unless that person is in a position of high-ranking authority (because their sins are compounded by extreme public scandal - they could lead their subjects/constituents astray). The reason for this is ignorance. It’s assumed that the laity don’t fully understand the depth of the Church teaching because we haven’t had the opportunity to learn it fully (which is why, without the guidance of good priests and bishops, our Catholic faith has often become superstition; see Spanish colonial New Mexico for examples of this). More often than not in Church history, formal excommunications have been done toward clergy who defied Church teaching (see Arius, Pelagius, Martin Luther, etc.).

 

[Kurisu35712]

To those posting, evolution is not the topic of this thread, and has no bearing on the state of one’s soul in the afterlife. Hence the Church’s lack of a definite stance on the topic. Both creationism and evolution are valid in the eyes of the Church so long as one accepts that all life proceeds from God. I don’t want the thread shut down for getting derailed.

From the CCC:

"283 The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. With Solomon they can say: “It is he who gave me unerring knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements… for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me.”

Dunno if that’s the right quote necessarily, but the topic is addressed. If anyone wants to discuss the topic further, please make a new thread about it. I’ll likely join in if someone does, in fact.

 

[Kurisu35712]

It sure does seem at times that some of the ones who seem to know the most about “religious rules and regulations” have quite a horrific view of God’s Justice.

This “view” sure makes some of the “blood sucking views” of human justice seem to be lenient to the point of absurdity.

One of the things about some people’s “conception” of heaven is that there will be quite a bit of room to do many things since there will not be that many to take up a lot of space.

It simply amazes me that some can have such a horrible, horrible conception of God and yet use such wonderful adjectives to describe God.

I hope, pray, beg and beseech God to do what some say is impossible for God to do, if God is even remotely like what some believe God To Be, and that is to completely destroy me, to unexist me.

To be completely honest Tom, I’m not entirely sure how you came to this conclusion. For the record, no one wants to see any number of people in Hell. No one rejoices when someone is in Hell, even if that person is horrible by our own societal standards. But we are aware that if there are people there, which Jesus has stated in the Gospel and Mary has stated at Fatima and other places, it is due to their own choices. It is not by any means impossible for God to bring all souls to Heaven, should those souls have a legitimate desire to go there. But if they do not, Hell is the natural consequence. Hell is the consequence of rejecting God.

Plus, I fail to see how anyone has proffered a horrible conception of God. My view is that God gives us a great degree of autonomy in regards to our relationship with Him, certainly more than we ever deserve, given how frequently we as a species abuse it. But regardless, He does give us that autonomy. We are invited to be the other half of an intimate relationship with Him. We are thus given the freedom to reject that relationship. And despite Him being our Creator, Friend, Father, so on and so forth, essentially the perfect fulfillment of any relationship we can conceive of on Earth, we still reject Him. And despite that, He is always willing to take us back into His arms again, so long as we make the effort to return. And the most profound part, to me, is that we cannot even return to Him without His help. We are nothing without God, yet we always have the opportunity to be everything with Him. I could go into an entire essay on the idea that, even with the things we try to do for God, we still need His help to do it. We are weak on our own, and I think that’s one reason why He loves us so much. One has nothing but love and happiness towards one’s infant child, despite the fact that the baby can’t even eat by it’s own power. Can’t move, can’t feed itself, can’t clean itself. It can cry for help and it can rest. And that’s essentially what we are to God, I think. We can’t even pray without His help, and yet He is always eager to help us before we even think to ask.

From that perspective, it is exceptionally hard to understand why someone would turn away from God. But we can. We are not infants, despite our helplessness. We have a limited understanding, true, but we also have some understanding. We know that evil thoughts and deeds result in consequences. We know that doing those things puts separation between ourselves and God. And if we choose to reject Him, and do not seek forgiveness and mercy, if we do not regret the evil we’ve done and cry out to Him before we die, we are taught that our souls will be in Hell. Hell is the result of pride that prevents us from asking for God’s mercy.

 

[Tom_Baum]

To be completely honest Tom, I’m not entirely sure how you came to this conclusion. For the record, no one wants to see any number of people in Hell. No one rejoices when someone is in Hell, even if that person is horrible by our own societal standards. But we are aware that if there are people there, which Jesus has stated in the Gospel and Mary has stated at Fatima and other places, it is due to their own choices. It is not by any means impossible for God to bring all souls to Heaven, should those souls have a legitimate desire to go there. But if they do not, Hell is the natural consequence. Hell is the consequence of rejecting God.

Plus, I fail to see how anyone has proffered a horrible conception of God. My view is that God gives us a great degree of autonomy in regards to our relationship with Him, certainly more than we ever deserve, given how frequently we as a species abuse it. But regardless, He does give us that autonomy. We are invited to be the other half of an intimate relationship with Him. We are thus given the freedom to reject that relationship. And despite Him being our Creator, Friend, Father, so on and so forth, essentially the perfect fulfillment of any relationship we can conceive of on Earth, we still reject Him. And despite that, He is always willing to take us back into His arms again, so long as we make the effort to return. And the most profound part, to me, is that we cannot even return to Him without His help. We are nothing without God, yet we always have the opportunity to be everything with Him. I could go into an entire essay on the idea that, even with the things we try to do for God, we still need His help to do it. We are weak on our own, and I think that’s one reason why He loves us so much. One has nothing but love and happiness towards one’s infant child, despite the fact that the baby can’t even eat by it’s own power. Can’t move, can’t feed itself, can’t clean itself. It can cry for help and it can rest. And that’s essentially what we are to God, I think. We can’t even pray without His help, and yet He is always eager to help us before we even think to ask.

From that perspective, it is exceptionally hard to understand why someone would turn away from God. But we can. We are not infants, despite our helplessness. We have a limited understanding, true, but we also have some understanding. We know that evil thoughts and deeds result in consequences. We know that doing those things puts separation between ourselves and God. And if we choose to reject Him, and do not seek forgiveness and mercy, if we do not regret the evil we’ve done and cry out to Him before we die, we are taught that our souls will be in Hell. Hell is the result of pride that prevents us from asking for God’s mercy.

As God-Incarnate said to the Apostles when asked about “Who can be saved?”, "With man it is impossible but with God ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE.

Even tho we are a “hard-headed and thick-necked people” (or words to that effect), according to one of my namesakes, Jesus did try to tell us something here.

And as God said concerning His Covenant with man (whether one, some, most or all, I do not know but I have my belief concerning what it is), even if man does not live up to his part of the bargain, I WILL.

Seems as if this is another place that God was/is trying to get thru to us.

“Father forgive them, they know not what they do”, some look at this as just a few of the “them”, I look at it as ALL OF THE “THEM” of all time.

As I have said before, God has ALL of the bases covered so that we will ALL make it home.

As far as, “I’m not entirely sure how you came to this conclusion”, if you mean what I think you mean it could have to do with the fact that I have experienced hell and spiritual death.

Justice to me means justice not getting blood sucking revenge just because you can, just because this has the word “just” in it does NOT mean that it has anything to do with JUSTICE, especially DIVINE JUSTICE.

I don’t know exactly how or even care how God will bring God’s Will to Fruition but I , most definitely, believe that God’s Plan, which God has had since before creation, is catholic.

 

[simpleas]

Catholic means Universal Just saying…

 

[davidv]

Catholic means Universal Just saying…

What does universal mean in this context? How does bear on the OP?

 

[Aloysium]

. . . I don’t know exactly how or even care how God will bring God’s Will to Fruition but I , most definitely, believe that God’s Plan, which God has had since before creation, is catholic.

I do believe in trying to understand the mystery of eternity, you create a scenario that could only be hell: day, after day, after day, after day, after day . . .

If it this were the case, I would imagine in the New Jerusalem:
“Hey, I remember you; the guy on the Forums, right. I didn’t see you at the 20,000,000,000th annual reunion.”
“I decided to take a break every million years,”

It may boil down to: In forming who we are, there is but one life to live.

If at the core of each action lies a nonacceptance that one is not a god, the reality will hit pretty hard.
Giving back the love that God gives us, it grows within us. But if we are like the man who buried his talent, it will be taken back.
And, not day, after day, after day, after day . . . but in eternity. This is what we were given and this is what we did with it.