Loved ones in Hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicMan64
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Forgiveness is a two-way street. God will forgive anything, but you have to accept that forgiveness too.
INFINITELY Merciful could possibly refer to both the “quantity and quality” and also to the “longevity”, couldn’t it?

Ever thought that God just might be able to “convince without forcing”, even if we do not know exactly how that might work?
 
Anyone who can be happy in heaven knowing they have loved ones who are suffering for eternity are what we humans call sociopaths.
 
Anyone who can be happy in heaven knowing they have loved ones who are suffering for eternity are what we humans call sociopaths.
Gotta love “what ifs”. While it is the perhaps only approach to forming a course of action, it is the worst way to sort out reality. People who live there lives thinking “what if” tend to have anxieties such as hypochondriasis and can never be satisfied because, what if.

So what is the reality?
God is about love.
Heaven is about love.
If one is not in heaven, one has no love.
If they are not there, one’s “loved ones” would never have been one’s loved ones.
It was an illusion.
 
Gotta love “what ifs”. While it is the perhaps only approach to forming a course of action, it is the worst way to sort out reality. People who live there lives thinking “what if” tend to have anxieties such as hypochondriasis and can never be satisfied because, what if.

So what is the reality?
God is about love.
Heaven is about love.
If one is not in heaven, one has no love.
One’s “loved ones” were never one’s loved ones.
It was an illusion.
Who used a ‘what if’?"
It certainly was not me so I’m not sure why you quoted me as if you were responding to something I said.
 
You indicated you were an atheist. My bad, I assumed atheists do not believe in heaven, that it came with not believing in God.
So what constitutes an atheist’s paradise?
Number 1. Believing in an after-life does not necessarily require a belief in a god.
But no I myself believe in neither.
Still don’t see where the ‘what if’ is.

Number 2. I don’t believe that there is such a thing as ‘paradise’ or ‘utopia’ except within our dreams, if however you mean something along the lines of an ideal society I’d say a futuristic society that values freedom, democracy, and egalitarianism.
Very Star Trek-ish basically.

Number 3. I do not speak for all atheists, no atheist speaks for all atheists.
My idea of an ideal place is likely very different then either Ayn Rand’s or Stalin’s.

So there is no such thing as a single atheists idea of ‘paradise’.
 
INFINITELY Merciful could possibly refer to both the “quantity and quality” and also to the “longevity”, couldn’t it?

Ever thought that God just might be able to “convince without forcing”, even if we do not know exactly how that might work?
I’m not sure what you mean by the first half, do you mean God can forgive people after they die? I’d have thought that at that point you’ve either made the choice to love God or you haven’t, and that choice stays with you into eternity. I doubt the lost souls would choose to accept God’s mercy even if they were given the choice, since they’ve chosen to prefer darkness to light.
On another note, I can’t understand how even God could convince everyone to love Him without forcing them. A number will freely choose it, hopefully a large number, but there’re going to be some who don’t. For one thing, I don’t know why there’d be such a thing as devils if that were the case.
 
I’m not sure what you mean by the first half, do you mean God can forgive people after they die? I’d have thought that at that point you’ve either made the choice to love God or you haven’t, and that choice stays with you into eternity. I doubt the lost souls would choose to accept God’s mercy even if they were given the choice, since they’ve chosen to prefer darkness to light.
On another note, I can’t understand how even God could convince everyone to love Him without forcing them. A number will freely choose it, hopefully a large number, but there’re going to be some who don’t. For one thing, I don’t know why there’d be such a thing as devils if that were the case.
Ignorance is not making a choice.
It cannot be called a free choice if they cannot make an informed decision.
 
Anyone who can be happy in heaven knowing they have loved ones who are suffering for eternity are what we humans call sociopaths.
What a bizarre comment. Does this mean that people who are happy on Earth, yet have loved ones who are suffering, are also sociopaths?
 
What a bizarre comment. Does this mean that people who are happy on Earth, yet have loved ones who are suffering, are also sociopaths?
They actually have the ability to do something about it.
 
They actually have the ability to do something about it.
That obviously isn’t true in every case. A loved one who chooses a self-destructive lifestyle is something we’ve all experienced. Many times there isn’t anything one can do about it.
 
Ignorance is not making a choice.
It cannot be called a free choice if they cannot make an informed decision.
Remember the parable of the sheep and the goats? Looking after other people and trying to do good is a large part of where you choose to love God, even if you didn’t know he existed. If, on the other hand, you choose to ignore the suffering of others or to be entirely focused on yourself…you can probably see where that’s going. We have everything we need to make an informed decision in our conscience.
 
That obviously isn’t true in every case. A loved one who chooses a self-destructive lifestyle is something we’ve all experienced. Many times there isn’t anything one can do about it.
Good point there, I’m going to add that:
  1. those in hell wouldn’t have anything lovable in them anyway - having rejected all good they’d only be a worsened version of their worst traits on earth. In fact, if they had the capability, they’d drag you down to suffer with them out of pure spite.
  2. wanting people to be sad in heaven because others are suffering out of their own selfishness (since in effect that’s the one main hing that leads to hell) is like saying you want evil to eternally have some power over good.
  3. We don’t even know how time works after we die, it’s not necessarily true that someone in heaven could say “the suffering in hell is now going on”. (Yes I took that point from Lewis)
 
Didn’t Jesus reportedly say, “With God ALL things are possible”?

Who knows, maybe God can do things that we think that God is incapable of doing!
That is true but Jesus told us to pray “Thy Will be done” - which implies that it has not, is not and will not always be fulfilled. In fact the colossal amount of evil in the world is overwhelming evidence that good and evil are not human conventions. It strongly suggests that Hell is not a fiction but a fact. The laws of nature do not explain the horrific atrocities committed by mankind. They imply that God is powerless **in this world **when confronted with diabolical evil and there is hardly any limit to the death and destruction His creatures can inflict on others. This is not surprising when we remember it is an abuse of the power He has shared with us. We have to accept the **possibility **that evil may exist forever but it would not harm anyone in heaven.
 
Anyone who can be happy in heaven knowing they have loved ones who are suffering for eternity are what we humans call sociopaths.
Not if they know they are rejected and hated by their loved ones. Happiness in heaven is not based on fantasy but fact…
 
What a bizarre comment. Does this mean that people who are happy on Earth, yet have loved ones who are suffering, are also sociopaths?
Do you think that the suffering of their loved ones is what it is that brings joy to those on earth who are happy and that their joy will be even more complete when they realize that their suffering loved ones will be suffering forever?

Or do you think that those with suffering loved ones on earth are looking to the “day” that the suffering of their loved ones will come to an end?

And unless I read it wrong, one of the joys of heaven, according to Thomas Aquinas, is seeing the suffering of the damned since he supposedly said, “That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of God more richly, a perfect sight of the punishment of the damned is granted them.”

Do you or anyone else who happens to read this think that one of the “joys” of heaven will be to gloat over the suffering of those in hell?
 
Remember the parable of the sheep and the goats? Looking after other people and trying to do good is a large part of where you choose to love God, even if you didn’t know he existed. If, on the other hand, you choose to ignore the suffering of others or to be entirely focused on yourself…you can probably see where that’s going. We have everything we need to make an informed decision in our conscience.
Concerning the “parable of the sheep and the goats”, don’t you think that, most likely, ALL of us are part sheep and part goat?

Do you think that anyone is ALL SHEEP?

Do you think that anyone is ALL GOAT?

Have you ever heard that Jesus, supposedly, took ALL of the sins of ALL upon Himself on the cross?

Since humans are capable of surgery, do you think that God just might be capable of DIVINE SURGERY?

Just as maggots devour all of the crud in what they do, could be that the “Consuming Fire of Love” could consume away the crud and leave the good, no matter how big or how small the good.
 
Good point there, I’m going to add that:
  1. those in hell wouldn’t have anything lovable in them anyway - having rejected all good they’d only be a worsened version of their worst traits on earth. In fact, if they had the capability, they’d drag you down to suffer with them out of pure spite.
Do you think/believe that the “Power of God” and the power of evil are equal?

Seeing as we are ALL “made in the Image and Likeness of God” than at least this would still be there, don’t you think?
  1. wanting people to be sad in heaven because others are suffering out of their own selfishness (since in effect that’s the one main hing that leads to hell) is like saying you want evil to eternally have some power over good.
Are you saying that those in heaven should be selfish with their happiness or that their lot is that they have to be selfish with their happiness?
  1. We don’t even know how time works after we die, it’s not necessarily true that someone in heaven could say “the suffering in hell is now going on”. (Yes I took that point from Lewis)
Thomas Aquinas sure seems to think so and he also seems to think that one of the “joys” of heaven is to see the suffering of those in hell.
 
Do you think that the suffering of their loved ones is what it is that brings joy to those on earth who are happy and that their joy will be even more complete when they realize that their suffering loved ones will be suffering forever?

Or do you think that those with suffering loved ones on earth are looking to the “day” that the suffering of their loved ones will come to an end?

And unless I read it wrong, one of the joys of heaven, according to Thomas Aquinas, is seeing the suffering of the damned since he supposedly said, “That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of God more richly, a perfect sight of the punishment of the damned is granted them.”

Do you or anyone else who happens to read this think that one of the “joys” of heaven will be to gloat over the suffering of those in hell?
Tom,

The claim that poster made was that anyone who could be happy in heaven while a loved one is in hell is a sociopath. I don’t agree with that, do you? I think you are reading more into my response (it was actually a question) than is warranted. I don’t know that any human soul is in hell or ever will be.

Btw, you inadvertently mis-characterize Aquinas. The Article from which you take that quote makes it clear that Aquinas is relying on both revelation and on reason that God will give the beatified knowledge of external events as they share divine life with Him. He cannot and will not deny then that this includes both knowledge of all that happens to wayfarers and the damned.

Furthermore, Aquinas explicitly denies that the just will gloat over the punishments of the damned:

I answer that, A thing may be a matter of rejoicing in two ways. First directly, when one rejoices in a thing as such: and thus the saints will not rejoice in the punishment of the wicked. Secondly, indirectly, by reason namely of something annexed to it: and in this way the saints will rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, by considering therein the order of Divine justice and their own deliverance, which will fill them with joy. And thus the Divine justice and their own deliverance will be the direct cause of the joy of the blessed: while the punishment of the damned will cause it indirectly. newadvent.org/summa/5094.htm#article3

You are of course free to disagree with Aquinas on all of this, but at least characterize his reasoning and conclusions accurately.
 
I wouldn’t waste a great deal of time on this concern…seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top