Isn't eternity in hell a disproportionate punishment?

[Sonny69]

Catholics pull from the teachings of the Church and from scripture, that missing mass purposly on Sunday is a mortal sin. ONE mortal sin is disasterous to the soul.

There was ligitimate disagreement

As you know, one can come to wrong conclusions with both.

• heretical reading sources
• improperly formed conscience that arrives at wrong conclusions from experiences

As I said earlier, pharisees were excoriatied by Jesus because of their hypocrasy.

who was being hypocritical?

What is it that we REALLY don’t understand about each other?

We know this.

Cardinal Kasper is in charge of ecumenical dialogue for the Catholic Church, and as you elude to above, it’s very difficult for the Catholic Church dialoguing with the Orthodox because you aren’t one Church. As Cardinal said

“We are increasingly conscious of the fact that an Orthodox Church does not really exist," he contends. "At the present stage, it does not seem that Constantinople is yet capable of integrating the different autocephalous Orthodox Churches; there are doubts about its primacy of honor, especially in Moscow.”

I see it differently.

1. • Those who returned, ended division, and followed the union Jesus prayed for. Those who remain divided, are in opposition to Jesus prayer. And in maintaining the theme of the topic of this thread, dissent and division is condemned in scripture. It is a mortal sin. [Gal 5:19-21]
   • While you see division, as Rome’s fault exclusively, I disagree. But I’ll be more ecumenical and say fault was with both sides. The popes have worked consistently at ending divisions.
   1. • The authority the pope possesses comes from the promises Jesus gave to Peter. It doesn’t come from a vote in council or by political intriques. He will ALWAYS have his primacy of authority.* IMO, before EO can talk of authority, and governing, you need to unite within yourselves first. Then I pray you unite with Peter again.

1. 1. 
      That is not what recent history teaches; speaking “ex-cathedra”, the real authority, was decdided by a council. For that matter, a council(s) decided the position itself existed. No evidence in the Bible or of the 1st and s2nd century church even mention the notion Papacy or magisterium. Do you think this might just be the tradition of man? I do based on historical evolution of the position. Use to be the Vicar of Christ was always known as the Holy Spirit, which was taken from Scripture, as recognized by the early church fathers writings. Then it made it’s way to bishops in general, then to a supreme bishop of Rome; all through councils.

 

[Sonny69]

Steve I guess it will take alot of time before you can understand the Orthodox. My impression with Catholics is that they do not really know the facts of what actually happened to the OC and the Catholic Church. The real nugget is the truth. All the Orthodox are waiting for is the truth to come out. Once Rome will do that then the relationship will be healed. The issue has nothing to do with Primacy at all. You think that way because the Catholic Church has not told you the truth about what really happened. When you do find the actual truth then you will realised that the Orthodox had always been right. You have been taught what you have been taught but without the actual truth. It is sad because the truth is there to read and once catholics discover it then they will realise their mistakes and will ask forgiveness for what they have done to the East. The Eastern Churches has always given the Pope and the Church of Rome its Primacy since the first Ecumenical councils. This is not in dispute. What is in dispute is Rome’s claims of juridiction over the East. Primacy means service and is not a political means to take over the whole Church. What Rome decided on was a terrible mistake. The Office of the Pope and the Church of Rome should have been a pastoral office and a pastoral church. But what happened was that Rome wanted control of the East. This was a political gain that has cost us insurmountable damage. The damage even though it was great will not stop God from uniting His Church. .

To say the church Jesus is building and will continue to build as not united is to not understand the true church. God’s bride is united from the day of pentecost. What is not united is the visable denominations, but the true bride is very united; but there are only a few compared to the many staking the claim as “church” or “Christian”. (see Romans 8:17-25 ) for a contextual understanding and perhaps it will click.

 

[mangy_dog]

How do we, as utterly inferior beings in comparison to God, have the ability to offend or “hurt” him? Assuming we do somehow have such power, would a God still wish hell on finite creatures like us as punishment?

Your comment is flawed on so many levels that its difficult to keep up with one single or even two or more issues.

Be that as it may.

The God that is Love and became flesh out of love for us, is by these very facts a humble God.
A God that wants to share all eternity with us - created beings. Finite in that we did have a beginning but will exist forever and ever. He created us with the power to choose and with an intellect. Then nourished us with the sacraments so we would cultivate a right conscience.

The phrase, " fear of God" - has very little to do with the fear of going to hell or the fear of loosing heaven and more to do with - the fear of offending the God who is Love and who is so giving -.

To have (as you say) the “power to offend God” - is the lowest limit of our [powers]…just like the freedom to choose between good and evil is the lowest limit of our freedom.

The levels of “offending God” become indistinguisable just like “the lesser of two evils” is still an evil choice.

God doesn’t “wish hell on us”. We have the [power] to land ourselves in hell all by our own doing.

God didn’t send Lucifer and the fallen angels to hell - God ratified the fallen angel’s desire to be as far away as spiritually possible from HIm and His Love and Goodness.

 

[steve_b]

It is strange Steve that you mentioned that you adhere to the consequences of sin and to the effects of it and yet you will not admit the sins commited by Rome to the East as being serious.

I never said that. A previous post I said both sides were at fault. But the popes have worked hard to reunite old divisions and heal old wounds. And it’s working, witness the reunion of various Eastern Churches to the Catholic Church going back 600 + years. But I never hear of the EO efforts to reunite. Why is that?
DK:

Isn’t eternity in hell a disproportionate punishment is the thread of this post and yet when I claim that Rome has seriously sinned against the East you want to defend Rome. And when I try to defend someone’s statements like Debora you want to tell her how seriously her sin of missing mass is.

Do not the East deserve some attention as well. It was the seriousness of the sins or you can say the gravity of the sins of the West that has lead us down this path. All the West has to do is admit the truth. But of course to admit the truth one has to recognize it as sin first. It seems to me you like to put certain people in the category as commiting serious sin but you will not admit that to your own Church. So what is it. Rome has formally apologized to the East from those unfortunate incidents that has caused too much tension for the last 1000 years. Soon you will see even a more formal recognition of those mistakes from the Popes because they will see in them a confession of wrongs that must be brought into the open for healing and forgiveness. Is not that what Confession is for? If serious sins can cause someone to enter a state of hell then what about the sins of Churches. They must be addressed in the same manner as one will confess their mortal sins. Without that confession then that person will not change and as you say hell will be the appropiate punishment. Since the Churches can act like individuals so the Churrches must do the same as the individual will do in the presence of God. There is no shame in admitting the truth. The Church of Rome has initiated that process already and in time will engage in admitting the whole truth so that the OC will accept it and grant forgiveness. Do you not go to a priest with your sins to be forgiven? And do you not think that God is waiting patiently for Rome to do the same and admit her mistakes so that the East can offer her forgiveness. If you do not believe so then I will ask you this 1 question. Who has been hurt the most from this? If you answer the East then it is Rome that needs to apologize. If you answer the West then it is us that needs to apologize. But if you check your recent Popes they have apologized to the East. So they admit the hurt was done to the East. All I am saying is that most Lay Catholics are uninformed about these Papal announcements and apologies. It is a start and soon it will come to a full confession and then full reconciliation. That is all that is necessary. Since this thread talks about the seriousness of sin and the effects to it I wonder how many Catholics realised how bad it was for the East to have that happened to them.

1. 
   *]Remaining divided, and purposely missing mass, are both direct acts of the will. Both can be remedied with an immediate act of the will
   *]The popes have acknowledged and apologised for sins they, and in extension the Catholic Church which they speak for, has done to the East. query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9907E5D71138F936A35756C0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all that article goes back 10 years
   *]JPII apologized with no caveots, even though there was plenty of intrigue on the part of the East that could have been addressed, but none of it was mentioned. It was a straight up apology by the pope and it was public not private… Was the apology of JPII accepted? Yes. Archbishop Christodoulos, the leader of the Greek Orthodox Church, led other Orthodox bishops in the meeting room of his residence in loud applause
   *]Did you not get the memo? Are you still fighting the war? BTW, where was the EO apology to the West for YOUR sins?
   
   As I said in a previous post, start a new thread on this subject. I think you’ll learn alot.

 

[steve_b]

To say the church Jesus is building and will continue to build as not united is to not understand the true church. God’s bride is united from the day of pentecost. What is not united is the visable denominations, but the true bride is very united; but there are only a few compared to the many staking the claim as “church” or “Christian”. (see Romans 8:17-25 ) for a contextual understanding and perhaps it will click.

Jesus builds ONE Church. The Catholic Church. It is visible. The invisible part is the saints already in heaven

Denominations are divisions and dissenters from the ONE Church, and these dissenters are ALL started by heretical men, NOT God, and these divisions and factions are condemned in scripture. [Gal 5:19…]

 

[steve_b]

That is not what recent history teaches; speaking “ex-cathedra”, the real authority, was decdided by a council. For that matter, a council(s) decided the position itself existed.

speaking infallibly on faith and morals is not new information. It has ALWAYS been with the Church. And it IS in scripture.
S:

No evidence in the Bible or of the 1st and s2nd century church even mention the notion Papacy or magisterium. Do you think this might just be the tradition of man? I do based on historical evolution of the position. Use to be the Vicar of Christ was always known as the Holy Spirit, which was taken from Scripture, as recognized by the early church fathers writings. Then it made it’s way to bishops in general, then to a supreme bishop of Rome; all through councils.

The topic is eternity in hell is a disproportionate punishment?.

I’ll be happy to address your other points on another thread.

 

[Sonny69]

Jesus builds ONE Church. The Catholic Church. It is visible. The invisible part is the saints already in heaven

Denominations are divisions and dissenters from the ONE Church, and these dissenters are ALL started by heretical men, NOT God, and these divisions and factions are condemned in scripture. [Gal 5:19…]

i will put before you Romans 8:18-25; so you are with out excuse for not reading it before. If you deny what it clearly states, then you in effect deny the word of God as being true. We could also go to John 17 and prove by the words of the Lord that His church is united.

18For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. **19For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. **20For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? 25But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.

The sons of God is the bride of Christ, the church. Your claim cannot be true unless Romans is false. But doesn’t every religion that claims one must belong to this or that church make the same exclusive claim? If I asked a Mormon, a Jehovah Witness or a Eastern Orthodox, they would all make the same claim that they are the true church based on extrabiblical revelation which cannot be proven and often nullifies the Word of God; such is the case here.

Are you going to now claim all the saints in heaven that are “invisible” are all Roman Catholic; that is what you must say for your statements to be true. i have nothing against you, but you must at least read Romans 8 to see that your argument makes no sense in light of Scripture and the last thing you want to do is dishonor the God you love by twisting His clear word. I know you are not doing that intentionally; at least I would hope not and I don’t thnk you are.

God bless you Steve!
S69

 

[Sonny69]

speaking infallibly on faith and morals is not new information. It has ALWAYS been with the Church. And it IS in scripture.

The topic is eternity in hell is a disproportionate punishment?.

I’ll be happy to address your other points on another thread.

You just did what you told me not to do…LOL I understand the frustration; God’s word does that, confounds human wisdom, to eveyone eventually, but that is actually a blessing in my opinion; has taught me a lot.

 

[TheAdvocate]

speaking infallibly on faith and morals is not new information. It has ALWAYS been with the Church. And it IS in scripture.

The topic is eternity in hell is a disproportionate punishment?.

I’ll be happy to address your other points on another thread.

Yes, people. Let’s not derail the thread with tangents. I am the OP, and I am grateful to all who have contributed. But if you feel you need to take this discussion into a different direction, start another thread.

Or, you can talk about why eternity for single deed can land you in the lake of fire for ever, and ever, and ever…and why that’s reasonable. I still think it’s harsh, and not scriptural–not for a single deed, anyway.

Let’s stay on topic, guys…

 

[steve_b]

You just did what you told me not to do…LOL I understand the frustration; God’s word does that, confounds human wisdom, to eveyone eventually, but that is actually a blessing in my opinion; has taught me a lot.

I merely answerd you then reminded you that your course was off topic.

 

[steve_b]

i will put before you Romans 8:18-25; so you are with out excuse for not reading it before. If you deny what it clearly states, then you in effect deny the word of God as being true. We could also go to John 17 and prove by the words of the Lord that His church is united.

18For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. **19For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. **20For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? 25But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.

The sons of God is the bride of Christ, the church. Your claim cannot be true unless Romans is false. But doesn’t every religion that claims one must belong to this or that church make the same exclusive claim? If I asked a Mormon, a Jehovah Witness or a Eastern Orthodox, they would all make the same claim that they are the true church based on extrabiblical revelation which cannot be proven and often nullifies the Word of God; such is the case here.

Are you going to now claim all the saints in heaven that are “invisible” are all Roman Catholic; that is what you must say for your statements to be true. i have nothing against you, but you must at least read Romans 8 to see that your argument makes no sense in light of Scripture and the last thing you want to do is dishonor the God you love by twisting His clear word. I know you are not doing that intentionally; at least I would hope not and I don’t thnk you are.

God bless you Steve!
S69

I’ll be happy to address each one of your issues that are off topic, on another thread. In the meantime, back to the subject of th thread, hell as punishment for all eternity.

Here’s 2 selections from Paul which lay groundwork for a very serious sin that will land one in hell if they don’t return to unity with the Church Jesus established in 33 a.d. BTW, that narrows the selection to ONE.

Rom 16:
17 I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. 18 For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people. 19 Everyone has heard about your obedience, so I rejoice because of you; but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil.
20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.

Key points

• those who divide from the Church don’t serve Our Lord but themselves
• Division is evil. Paul even lays those who divide at the feet of Satan.
• Satan is the cause of division, NOT God. But it’s interesting, who does Paul say Satan will be crushed under the feet of? The Church of Rome

Gal 5:19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

IOW, staying with the theme of dissent and division from the Church, if not corrected by the one who is divided from the Church, will keep them from inheriting heaven. i.e., they go to hell.

Sound like too stiff a punishment? Remember, Paul is writing this under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

 

[TheAdvocate]

I’ll be happy to address each one of your issues that are off topic, on another thread. In the meantime, back to the subject of th thread, hell as punishment for all eternity.

Here’s 2 selections from Paul which lay groundwork for a very serious sin that will land one in hell if they don’t return to unity with the Church Jesus established in 33 a.d. BTW, that narrows the selection to ONE.

Rom 16:
17 I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. 18 For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people. 19 Everyone has heard about your obedience, so I rejoice because of you; but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil.
20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.

Key points

• those who divide from the Church don’t serve Our Lord but themselves
• Division is evil. Paul even lays those who divide at the feet of Satan.
• Satan is the cause of division, NOT God. But it’s interesting, who does Paul say Satan will be crushed under the feet of? The Church of Rome

Gal 5:19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

IOW, staying with the theme of dissent and division from the Church, if not corrected by the one who is divided from the Church, will keep them from inheriting heaven. i.e., they go to hell.

Sound like too stiff a punishment? Remember, Paul is writing this under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

True, Paul did write about these sins. What isn’t clear is whether a single instance of one of those sins would land you where the worm doesn’t die forever and ever. “Those who live like this” implies a persistance in a particular lifestyle. One instance of hatred? Envy? Jealousy? A fit of anger? Whoever does one of these once (yes, with full knowledge and consent) will go to hell for an ETERNAL punishment? Only a persistence in any one of these would signal a true turning away from God.

 

[Nelka]

The Fatima Messages of 1917

Sunday, May 13, 1917:

Accompanied by two bright flashes of light, Our Lady appeared in a radiant light to the children and said, "Do not be afraid. I will do you no harm.”

Lucia asked, "Where are you from?”

Our Lady responded, "I am from Heaven.”

Lucia asked, "What do you want of us?”

Our Lady responded, "I came to ask you to come here on the thirteenth day for six months at this same time, and then I will tell you who I am and what I want. And afterwards, I will return here a seventh time.”

Lucia asked, "Will I go to Heaven?”

Our Lady said, "Yes, you will.”

Lucia asked, "And Jacinta?”

Our Lady responded, "She also.”

Lucia asked, "And Francisco? Will he go to Heaven too?”

Our Lady said, "Yes, but first he must say many rosaries.”

Lucia then asked of the fate of two girls who had recently died. Our Lady told her one was already in Heaven and that the other would be "in Purgatory until the end of the world.”

 

[slywakka250]

The Fatima Messages of 1917

Sunday, May 13, 1917:

Accompanied by two bright flashes of light, Our Lady appeared in a radiant light to the children and said, "Do not be afraid. I will do you no harm.”

Lucia asked, "Where are you from?”

Our Lady responded, "I am from Heaven.”

Lucia asked, "What do you want of us?”

Our Lady responded, "I came to ask you to come here on the thirteenth day for six months at this same time, and then I will tell you who I am and what I want. And afterwards, I will return here a seventh time.”

Lucia asked, "Will I go to Heaven?”

Our Lady said, "Yes, you will.”

Lucia asked, "And Jacinta?”

Our Lady responded, "She also.”

Lucia asked, "And Francisco? Will he go to Heaven too?”

Our Lady said, "Yes, but first he must say many rosaries.”

Lucia then asked of the fate of two girls who had recently died. Our Lady told her one was already in Heaven and that the other would be "in Purgatory until the end of the world.”

yay! no mention of hell here.

 

[steve_b]

True, Paul did write about these sins. What isn’t clear is whether a single instance of one of those sins would land you where the worm doesn’t die forever and ever. "Those who live like this" implies a persistance in a particular lifestyle. One instance of hatred? Envy? Jealousy? A fit of anger? Whoever does one of these once (yes, with full knowledge and consent) will go to hell for an ETERNAL punishment? Only a persistence in any one of these would signal a true turning away from God.

Bottomline, we are managers of our own souls. Therefore, one needs to get rid of mortal sin immediately. Don’t waste time getting rid of it. One who procrastinates, is still in mortal sin. If they die 5 minutes from now, that would make them guilty of persistance in their sin since they died in mortal sin. And let’s face it, no one knows the day or the second one will die.

As an observation, It seems many are more interested in tightly managing their money and investments and get so upset if their portfolios should drop ever so slightly, but are sloppy managers of their most important asset their soul. If one gets wiped out financially, it’s NOT an eternal loss. If one’s soul gets wiped out, (loss of sanctifying grace) due to mortal sin, and dies in that state, that is an eternal loss of heaven and an eternity in hell

 

[steve_b]

yay! no mention of hell here.

All that means is that the girl didn’t die in mortal sin.

Mary also said

“More souls go to Hell because of the sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

 

[alacoque]

Bottomline, we are managers of our own souls. Therefore, one needs to get rid of mortal sin immediately. Don’t waste time getting rid of it. One who procrastinates, is still in mortal sin. If they die 5 minutes from now, that would make them guilty of persistance in their sin since they died in mortal sin. And let’s face it, no one knows the day or the second one will die.

As an observation, It seems many are more interested in tightly managing their money and investments and get so upset if their portfolios should drop ever so slightly, but are sloppy managers of their most important asset their soul. If one gets wiped out financially, it’s NOT an eternal loss. If one’s soul gets wiped out, (loss of sanctifying grace) due to mortal sin, and dies in that state, that is an eternal loss of heaven and an eternity in hell

I think it’s very important to point out that hell is for those who die in the state of unrepented mortal sin. And, in a case like that, of mortal sin completely unrepented of, we actually choose hell for ourselves. No one goes to hell by accident…it is for those who freely and fully reject God and want no part of Him - and, as they say, “you know who you are”

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yes, people. Let’s not derail the thread with tangents. I am the OP, and I am grateful to all who have contributed. But if you feel you need to take this discussion into a different direction, start another thread.

Or, you can talk about why eternity for single deed can land you in the lake of fire for ever, and ever, and ever…and why that’s reasonable. I still think it’s harsh, and not scriptural–not for a single deed, anyway.

Let’s stay on topic, guys…

Because --and I know I pointed this out several times but there have been many posts and perhaps you missed it --it is not 'a single deed done at one ‘time point’, then stopped.

What one chooses freely in choosing hell is this:

Unrepented mortal sin.
Which means it is not a sin ‘done once’. Unrepented, it is CONTINUAL in existence.
And since one’s soul exists externally (out of time, yet ‘eternal’) and since one CONTINUES to NOT REPENT, that sin is likewise continuous throughout eternity.

---

Understand?

---

Now here is a counter-example.

Man A commits a mortal sin. Man A, after some time (during which that mortal sin has ‘continued’) repents and confesses and is forgiven. Man A dies. Man A (assuming no other unrepented mortal sins on his soul) will not choose hell. Did Man A commit a mortal sin? Yes. However, it was REPENTED. So, the mere action of one mortal sin does not ‘guarantee hell.’ It is only UNREPENTED MORTAL SIN AT DEATH that would do so.

Man B commits a mortal sin. Man B never repents. Man B dies, unrepentent. Man B has chosen hell. The sin (because he never repented) is a continuous sin and it REMAINS CONTINUOUS THROUGH ETERNITY. Thus, the condition (SELF-INFLICTED and FREELY CHOSEN) is a ‘continuous’ one.

See the difference?

Here is a final, man C.

Man C commits a mortal sin. However, there is some question that either Man C never completely understood that this was mortal, or that there was SOME OTHER FACTOR that influenced him over which he had little or no control.

Here’s the deal. Man C, IF he truly did not know this was a mortal sin, cannot be held FULLY responsible. God does not damn us for something if we truly did not know it was wrong! However, there IS an effect of mortal sin. (Just as if we hit a window with a baseball accidentally, the window breaks, even if we didn’t MEAN for it to do so).

God is still ‘hurt’ by the sin even if the sin was not fully intentional. Man C thus will have the opportunity to either repent for that sin, or else to say, “So, it was mortal? I don’t care, I would do it all over again even knowing it was gravely wrong.”

The mortal sin which was unrepented (but was never fully ‘realized’ as mortal) thus exists continuously UNLESS when God makes it fully known, Man C repents. With the repentence, the mortal sin’s effect ceases with God’s forgiveness.

If however Man C does NOT repent, then he, like Man B, will continue on with that mortal sin. The continuous mortal sin throughout eternity thus as a CONSEQUENCE will entail the continued presence of the men in their FREELY CHOSEN HELL.

In order to choose hell he will not only be fully aware of what he is doing, he will be absolutely free to choose otherwise–to choose heaven. He will NOT get ‘railroaded’. He will NOT be ‘thrown’ into hell unwillingly. EVER.

 

[slywakka250]

In order to choose hell he will not only be fully aware of what he is doing, he will be absolutely free to choose otherwise–to choose heaven. He will NOT get ‘railroaded’. He will NOT be ‘thrown’ into hell unwillingly. EVER.

What about those who do not believe in hell?? If you have zero belief in hell or even the afterlife, I highly doubt you are guaranteed heaven. Therefore, if you don’t believe in hell, you still might end up there.

It’s hard for me to see how this is freely chosen. Sure, you might know that some of your sins are bad, but you are literally clueless to just how steep the consequences will be. You might think that the worst thing that can happen is a physical death. If you believed in a literal eternal hell, you might of thought twice before committing those serious sins of yours.

how is a person who doesn’t believe in hell or even the afterlife not “railroaded”, because at death they find out all of a sudden the universe is much more dangerous, and their actions have much more serious consequences than they ever imagined. Sure they knew some of the things they did were wrong, but they had NO IDEA just how far reaching (eternal) the consequences would be???

 

[Tantum_ergo]

What about those who do not believe in hell?? If you have zero belief in hell or even the afterlife, I highly doubt you are guaranteed heaven. Therefore, if you don’t believe in hell, you still might end up there.

It’s hard for me to see how this is freely chosen. Sure, you might know that some of your sins are bad, but you are literally clueless to just how steep the consequences will be. You might think that the worst thing that can happen is a physical death. If you believed in a literal eternal hell, you might of thought twice before committing those serious sins of yours.

how is a person who doesn’t believe in hell or even the afterlife not “railroaded”, because at death they find out all of a sudden the universe is much more dangerous, and their actions have much more serious consequences than they ever imagined. Sure they knew some of the things they did were wrong, but they had NO IDEA just how far reaching (eternal) the consequences would be???

Because, hon, they are not thrown into hell ‘clueless’. Really, they aren’t.

This is not a game of ‘gotcha’ where IF the person ‘had been aware’ they WOULD have chosen ‘differently.’

The whole point is that actions have consequences. Including the action of repentence and contrition. It will save you even if you have committed mortal sin before.

Remember what I said about 'full knowledge" etc. in an earlier post?

IF the person does not have ‘full knowledge’ that a sin has eternal consequences, God is NOT going to say, “Aha, sucker, now you’ll fry!” God gives people many chances.

And IF the person at death repents. . .which is what you seem to be implying. . .with a, “oh my goodness, if I’d known hell existed I would not have done this, I’m sorry Lord”. . .they will be forgiven.

It is ONLY those who are fully aware of the gravity–and consequences–and who at death continue to freely choose hell–who go there.

If your friend ‘didn’t believe in hell’, died, and became aware–and REPENTED–your friend is obviously not choosing hell, right??

God is not going to send a repentent soul to hell. It doesn’t work that way. Sorrow and acceptance of God’s forgiveness lead to salvation, not damnation.

Nobody who ‘doesn’t believe in hell’, but finds out about it at death, is going to be thrust kicking and screaming into hell while they wail, “I wish I’d believed, I wouldn’t have done it if I’d known.”