Justice: a heaven and hell question

[LilyM]

Is it valid to compare a life and the eternal state of a soul to the 400m hurdles? How is life reducable to this sort of cold analogy? It is senseless anyway ; in a race there can be no winner without losers.

Well, no analogy is perfect of course, but the racing analogy was used several times by St Paul, who was anything but cold.

And you’d better believe there are sporting contests without losers - contests of the ‘here, everyone gets an award’ kind. And doesn’t it just make participating SO special!

Even then they might balk at giving anything to someone who didn’t just fall over but refused to get up again and complete the race.

 

[Poseidon]

The classic mistake of thinking we can earn our way to heaven. The supposed “good” person hasn’t necessarily taken Jesus into their heart, accepting Him as their Savior. We also make the mistake of condemning people. The Bible says God’s judgments are righteous, He knows whether the "good"person really believes.

So belief in Jesus=righteousness? Mother Teresa would’ve been a bad person if she was a Hindu? Only Christians are capable of being “righteous” people?

 

[LilyM]

So belief in Jesus=righteousness? Mother Teresa would’ve been a bad person if she was a Hindu? Only Christians are capable of being “righteous” people?

She could’ve been Catholic and equally a bad person - if she did what she was doing for the wrong reasons - say fame and publicity, to stroke her ego, or whatnot.

By the same token we acknowledge many people who never knew Jesus - the great prophets and patriarchs of the Old Testament for starters - as righteous. And certainly we acknowledge at least the possibility that other non-Christians, including Hindus, can be saved.

On the other hand, we believe that Christianity offers certain helps
to righteousness which aren’t available to those of other faiths. Kinda like a hiker may stumble onto the right trail without a map, but is much more likely to find it without difficulty if given one.

And Catholicism still more - perhaps akin to giving your hiker a GPS. Not that someone with a GPS cannot still go astray, but thy have much better chances.

 

[teachccd]

Regarding whether anyone is actually in hell, I recall reading an article regarding the Fatima miracle where one or all three of the children said they were shown visions of souls in hell by Mary. She told them that most of them were there for sins of the flesh.

This is not official Church teaching since it is private revelation. For all we know their visions could have been what God wanted us to know to lead a holy life. There is NO person defined (as there are saints in heaven) as being in hell. So again I stress that we are not the ones to probe the mind of God…teachccd

 

[teachccd]

It amazes me that a self acclaimed atheist is driving all of those on this thread to the speculation of the infinite mercy and love of God. He or she starts off with a scenerio that cannot read into anyone’s hearts and then expects to “trick” us into a corner. Of the two who goes to heaven and who goes to hell??? Maybe both, maybe neither. The fact of the matter is, we don’t know. My question is why would an atheist have an interest in how an “imaginary” being would judge people in the first place? If you do not believe in God then there is no heaven or hell as far as you are concerned. If you do believe in God then restate that in your profile and come to learn about our God of infinite love. Stop playing games and mainly being unfair to yourself…teachccd

 

[Poseidon]

It amazes me that a self acclaimed atheist is driving all of those on this thread to the speculation of the infinite mercy and love of God. He or she starts off with a scenerio that cannot read into anyone’s hearts and then expects to “trick” us into a corner. Of the two who goes to heaven and who goes to hell??? Maybe both, maybe neither. The fact of the matter is, we don’t know. My question is why would an atheist have an interest in how an “imaginary” being would judge people in the first place? If you do not believe in God then there is no heaven or hell as far as you are concerned. If you do believe in God then restate that in your profile and come to learn about our God of infinite love. Stop playing games and mainly being unfair to yourself…teachccd

I get this a lot on here. “Why would an atheist ask that?” Well, I can be interested in something even if I don’t think it’s true. I like to come up with hypothetical “what if” scenarios, and I like to discuss them. I also like to think critically, and then get others’ (name removed by moderator)ut on my thoughts.

I don’t have to believe in something to enjoy thinking about it. I like talking about religion. So what? I also like reading fiction. Doesn’t mean I think it’s real.

 

[underacloud]

Another response to this hypothetical is to consider what justice really means.

The Catholic Catechism describes justice thus:

“1807 Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the constant and firm will to give their due to God and neighbor. Justice toward God is called the “virtue of religion.” Justice toward men disposes one to respect the rights of each and to establish in human relationships the harmony that promotes equity with regard to persons and to the common good. The just man, often mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures, is distinguished by habitual right thinking and the uprightness of his conduct toward his neighbor.”

Thus, for us Catholics, it is just that a person gives their due to God. To reject God is not just. Diana has not been just in her dealing with God, if she continues to the last to reject God.

But I suppose a Catholic definition of justice will not be sufficient. If justice is, for example, a reality of natural law, such as Locke would argue, then each action of Mike and Diana needs to be held to account. Unfortunately, we all fail in our ability to make amends for our sins. This is where Christ comes in. He pays the price that justice demands for our sins. He evens the ledger. So, we can each accept this wonderful gift, and have what we owe to justice erased, or we can reject this gift, and remain in our debt.

In each of these considerations, where is there any injustice?

 

[Jitterbug]

I think about it THIS way:

If Diana had been given a chance to look at what she’s done without the influence of cocaine, would she have Contrite of Heart? If she HAD woken up the next morning regretful, would she have gone to confession at the next possible opportunity?

Since God is timeless and Knows what she WOULD have done, then THAT closes the answer for me.

It’s like If I comitted a mortal sin, and on my way to the parish for confession, I’m hit by a bus 2 blocks away…WHY would God say “Sorry son…You were THIS close…”?

So, I don’t think any of us could really answer until we have that information,

(PS…Sorry if this violated doctrine, but it’s what I was told.)

 

[Poseidon]

I think about it THIS way:

If Diana had been given a chance to look at what she’s done without the influence of cocaine, would she have Contrite of Heart? If she HAD woken up the next morning regretful, would she have gone to confession at the next possible opportunity?

Since God is timeless and Knows what she WOULD have done, then THAT closes the answer for me.

It’s like If I comitted a mortal sin, and on my way to the parish for confession, I’m hit by a bus 2 blocks away…WHY would God say “Sorry son…You were THIS close…”?

So, I don’t think any of us could really answer until we have that information,

(PS…Sorry if this violated doctrine, but it’s what I was told.)

You’re implying here that Diana would never have gone to confession or repented. What is it to God to let her live a year longer, 30 years longer, 100 years longer? Wouldn’t it be worth it if it would result in the salvation of her soul?

And even if it was true that Diana never would have repented, God still could have saved her (without violating her free will) by giving her a heart attack while she was still living a moral life. Maybe it sounds harsh, but it’s certainly worth losing a few months or years of life if it means you’ll avoid eternal punishment and get eternal bliss.

 

[LilyM]

You’re implying here that Diana would never have gone to confession or repented. What is it to God to let her live a year longer, 30 years longer, 100 years longer? Wouldn’t it be worth it if it would result in the salvation of her soul?

And even if it was true that Diana never would have repented, God still could have saved her (without violating her free will) by giving her a heart attack while she was still living a moral life. Maybe it sounds harsh, but it’s certainly worth losing a few months or years of life if it means you’ll avoid eternal punishment and get eternal bliss.

But that’s not the way justice works. A judge takes a person as they are at time of sentencing.

If you express no remorse before you go to sentencing, you’ll accordingly get punished as being unremorseful. The court doesn’t put your case on hold for a year or 30 years to wait and see if you later become remorseful. A judge has to be fair to the victims too, don’t forget, and it isn’t fair to them to unduly delay sentencing for no better reason than vague hopes of an expression of remorse.

Maybe after a year or 20 in prison you will feel remorse, and express that. It may impact whether you get parole a little earlier, but not in the same way as it would if you were remorseful before sentencing. And again that’s fair - the victim has had a year or twenty of extra anguish knowing that not only did you do wrong to them but weren’t sorry for it.

Besides which, for all we know there are better and worse levels of punishment or reward in the afterlife - among people who go to Hell or Heaven - that do take into account things like the circumstances of the person’s death.

Being eternal, obviously these rewards or punishments can’t take the form of a lesser length of punishment or a greater length of reward. But other differences can exist that are equally fair, I suppose.

 

[Jitterbug]

You’re implying here that Diana would never have gone to confession or repented. What is it to God to let her live a year longer, 30 years longer, 100 years longer? Wouldn’t it be worth it if it would result in the salvation of her soul?

And even if it was true that Diana never would have repented, God still could have saved her (without violating her free will) by giving her a heart attack while she was still living a moral life. Maybe it sounds harsh, but it’s certainly worth losing a few months or years of life if it means you’ll avoid eternal punishment and get eternal bliss.

Well why don’t you tell us? You made this simulation.

If she HAD lived another day, would she have repented?

 

[Poseidon]

Well why don’t you tell us? You made this simulation.

If she HAD lived another day, would she have repented?

Yes. Let’s assume that she would have.

 

[Jitterbug]

Yes. Let’s assume that she would have.

I’m ALSO assuming she had Perfect Contrite of Heart.

Thus, had the affects of drugs not been present, and she would’ve repented at the next possible time…I see no reason why she couldn’t get to heaven via Purgatory.

But this is only speculation. After all, we do not know the will of God. And only He knows our hearts.

But my speculation is that she could very well be saved.

 

[Poseidon]

I’m ALSO assuming she had Perfect Contrite of Heart.

Thus, had the affects of drugs not been present, and she would’ve repented at the next possible time…I see no reason why she couldn’t get to heaven via Purgatory.

But this is only speculation. After all, we do not know the will of God. And only He knows our hearts.

But my speculation is that she could very well be saved.

But what if she wouldn’t have repented at the next possible moment? What if she would have repented a year later? Or 30 years later? I see no reason why God could keep her around for an extra day but not an extra year - he is eternal after all.

And again I ask, even if she never would have repented, why would God let her get to that stage? If I am a parent I want my kids to be able to run around outside, but if I see my kid heading toward a road I’m going to stop her. God could do the same - he looks at Diana’s life and sees she’s heading toward the proverbial road of unrepentant sin, so why doesn’t he stop her by bringing her home (aka killing her)? That doesn’t interfere with her free will, and saves her from hell - a pretty good choice if you ask me.

 

[LilyM]

But what if she wouldn’t have repented at the next possible moment? What if she would have repented a year later? Or 30 years later? I see no reason why God could keep her around for an extra day but not an extra year - he is eternal after all.

And again I ask, even if she never would have repented, why would God let her get to that stage? If I am a parent I want my kids to be able to run around outside, but if I see my kid heading toward a road I’m going to stop her. God could do the same - he looks at Diana’s life and sees she’s heading toward the proverbial road of unrepentant sin, so why doesn’t he stop her by bringing her home (aka killing her)? That doesn’t interfere with her free will, and saves her from hell - a pretty good choice if you ask me.

But Diana is not a child. She is an adult. Gifted with the blessings and responsibilities of free will. We can only speculate as to why God organized things thus. I would imagine that He knows that suffering, and even sin, have a function and purpose that cannot be fulfilled, or not as well, in their absence.

Ever seen a parent try to keep their adult child away from bad things - drugs, alcohol, abusive relationships? How successful are they usually? Do they not sometimes have to let the child go and experience the bad things and hit rock bottom in order for the child to face their problems and improve? Sadly, sometimes they are too far gone for tough love or anything else to work.

 

[Poseidon]

But Diana is not a child. She is an adult. Gifted with the blessings and responsibilities of free will. We can only speculate as to why God organized things thus. I would imagine that He knows that suffering, and even sin, have a function and purpose that cannot be fulfilled, or not as well, in their absence.

Ever seen a parent try to keep their adult child away from bad things - drugs, alcohol, abusive relationships? How successful are they usually? Do they not sometimes have to let the child go and experience the bad things and hit rock bottom in order for the child to face their problems and improve? Sadly, sometimes they are too far gone for tough love or anything else to work.

Compared to God Diana is a child. And maybe if Diana had lived longer she would have improved. She was never given the chance to though.

And had God wanted her to stay away from the drugs and sex he could have, as I said before, by killing her. 100% effective, 100% in her best interests, because she gets a quick ride to heaven (maybe a little purgatory, but what’s a little time there compared to eternity in hell?) and 100% saves her from eternal damnation. But it didn’t happen. Diana had a chance to get to heaven, but circumstances took it out of her control. This is in sharp contrast to Mike, who was horrible his whole life and got to go to heaven because he was lucky enough to die at the right moment. Diana was not any worse than Mike (in fact she was overall a much better person) she was just unlucky enough to die at precisely the wrong moment.

 

[Jitterbug]

Compared to God Diana is a child. And maybe if Diana had lived longer she would have improved. She was never given the chance to though.

And had God wanted her to stay away from the drugs and sex he could have, as I said before, by killing her. 100% effective, 100% in her best interests, because she gets a quick ride to heaven (maybe a little purgatory, but what’s a little time there compared to eternity in hell?) and 100% saves her from eternal damnation. But it didn’t happen. Diana had a chance to get to heaven, but circumstances took it out of her control. This is in sharp contrast to Mike, who was horrible his whole life and got to go to heaven because he was lucky enough to die at the right moment. Diana was not any worse than Mike (in fact she was overall a much better person) she was just unlucky enough to die at precisely the wrong moment.

To me, that thought process is almost like seeing someone at the top of a Building ready to jump, so your thought is “I KNOW! To keep them from comitting suicide, I’ll shoot them in the head!”

It WOULD be taking her free will. Because she chose to reject God and she faces the retalliation. You cannot say under ANY circumstances that sin is acceptable.

I don’t think God sits in heaven with an adding machine analyzing what good or bad you’ve done.

Like this.

If a child is normally obedient to their parents, but plays in the street in direct violation of their commands, why should he MAGICALLY be protected from harm?

One must face the risks of thier lifestyle. Her risk was to put herself in a position where she could die in mortal sin.

We don’t know who is in heaven and who is not. Maybe God would show mercy, maybe she would face damnation.

That’s not for us to decide.

 

[Poseidon]

To me, that thought process is almost like seeing someone at the top of a Building ready to jump, so your thought is “I KNOW! To keep them from comitting suicide, I’ll shoot them in the head!”

Not exactly. It would be more like pulling her off the ledge. God killing her wouldn’t be the same as me killing her, because God knows he’s bringing her to heaven and saving her from hell. Also, suicide isn’t really comparable to hell.

It WOULD be taking her free will. Because she chose to reject God and she faces the retaliation. You cannot say under ANY circumstances that sin is acceptable.

I’m not saying that sin is acceptable. And how would killing her a year early interfere with her free will? She had free will her whole life, and God could just give her a little less life to prevent her from making bad choices. She chose good for 35 years and bad for 3 months, so why couldn’t God just take her during her good period? Why did he let her go into her bad period before letting her die?

I don’t think God sits in heaven with an adding machine analyzing what good or bad you’ve done.

Like this.

If a child is normally obedient to their parents, but plays in the street in direct violation of their commands, why should he MAGICALLY be protected from harm?

If the parents are capable of magically protecting him then I think that they have a responsibility to do so. If you could say “abracadabra” and make your child immune to being run over, what possible justification could you give for not doing it? If you see your child running into the street and you make no effort to stop them then you’re a terrible parent. You are responsible for your children, and God more so even than a human parent, because he can simultaneously and infallibly watch everyone without ever missing anything.

One must face the risks of thier lifestyle. Her risk was to put herself in a position where she could die in mortal sin.

We don’t know who is in heaven and who is not. Maybe God would show mercy, maybe she would face damnation.

That’s not for us to decide.

Yes, she did do that. However I think the idea that God would throw her in hell after making no effort to save her repulsive. It’s like a parent who watches, unconcerned as their child plays in the street, then punishes them for being hit by a truck while making no effort to get them to a hospital.

 

[Jitterbug]

Not exactly. It would be more like pulling her off the ledge. God killing her wouldn’t be the same as me killing her, because God knows he’s bringing her to heaven and saving her from hell. Also, suicide isn’t really comparable to hell.

I’m not saying that sin is acceptable. And how would killing her a year early interfere with her free will? She had free will her whole life, and God could just give her a little less life to prevent her from making bad choices. She chose good for 35 years and bad for 3 months, so why couldn’t God just take her during her good period? Why did he let her go into her bad period before letting her die?

If the parents are capable of magically protecting him then I think that they have a responsibility to do so. If you could say “abracadabra” and make your child immune to being run over, what possible justification could you give for not doing it? If you see your child running into the street and you make no effort to stop them then you’re a terrible parent. You are responsible for your children, and God more so even than a human parent, because he can simultaneously and infallibly watch everyone without ever missing anything.

Yes, she did do that. However I think the idea that God would throw her in hell after making no effort to save her repulsive. It’s like a parent who watches, unconcerned as their child plays in the street, then punishes them for being hit by a truck while making no effort to get them to a hospital.

What answer are you actually looking for?

I gave both ends of the possible spectrum, and neither seem to please you.

I’m going to settle on this.

God may save her if she had contrite of heart the next day.

If it would take thirty years to be remorseful, I think that’s pushing it a bit.

 

[LilyM]

Not exactly. It would be more like pulling her off the ledge. God killing her wouldn’t be the same as me killing her, because God knows he’s bringing her to heaven and saving her from hell. Also, suicide isn’t really comparable to hell.

I’m not saying that sin is acceptable. And how would killing her a year early interfere with her free will? She had free will her whole life, and God could just give her a little less life to prevent her from making bad choices. She chose good for 35 years and bad for 3 months, so why couldn’t God just take her during her good period? Why did he let her go into her bad period before letting her die?

If the parents are capable of magically protecting him then I think that they have a responsibility to do so. If you could say “abracadabra” and make your child immune to being run over, what possible justification could you give for not doing it? If you see your child running into the street and you make no effort to stop them then you’re a terrible parent. You are responsible for your children, and God more so even than a human parent, because he can simultaneously and infallibly watch everyone without ever missing anything.

Yes, she did do that. However I think the idea that God would throw her in hell after making no effort to save her repulsive. It’s like a parent who watches, unconcerned as their child plays in the street, then punishes them for being hit by a truck while making no effort to get them to a hospital.

He gave us the life and death and teaching of His only Son so that she might have the chance - and continues, through our religious leaders, to every moment send forth through many channels a message of repentance from sin, and of the ready availability of His abundant mercy merely for the sincere asking.

That is the opposite of no effort.