M
Maximus1
Guest
It is understandable. There has been a great deal of teaching from the standpoint of scarcity of God’s grace and salvation.
Haha, thanks Maximus. I appreciate your posts too. Every now and then I do allow myself to get sucked into these discussions. I continue in them if my interlocutor shows any sign of openness on the issue. Without genuine openness, there is no possibility of dialogue—it just turns into two people making their own points for no real purpose. It seems that my exchange here with Thomas has turned into this same phenomenon. But it’s ok.You must do this often. Lol. I enjoy reading your posts
I see people talking about the universal Imago Dei on these forums and in Catholic writings all the time.I would only revise this to make it a little worse–Catholics seem perfectly OK accepting their own value and basking in the reality of being a child of God. But, the disturbing fact is that too many Catholics seem reticent to believe in the value of the “other.” That all humans bear the image and likeness of God is a plain enough teaching (and something that we intrinsically recognize about ourselves). But, we’re somehow OK with “the other” being cast into an unending Hell, as long as we escape that fate?!? So very bizarre…
Neither Scripture nor Tradition nor the Church teaches the part you find scary and off-putting. God loved us “while we were yet sinners,” and the death of Christ was not to satiate His bloodthirst but to un-break what we humans broke. Western Christians may like our legal metaphors for the atonement (as contrasted with the more medical metaphor I believe the East prefers), but Catholics have never been big on penal substitution.Then there is the Church mission. And my own desire to love God. Divine Union. The intimacy shared by mystics like John of the Cross, Song of Songs, and many others. A pretty consistent body of intimate experience reported. Being made fearful of an all powerful being who hated us , but then could love us once Divine Justice was satiated killing his beloved, is scary. And it didn’t sit right and still doesnt. The consistent picture from our Saints and mystics is a consistent and intimate love.
No. There is a current thread here at CAF where many acknowledge (even on different sides of the Hell issue) that your statements here are incorrect. See here as an example.Our Lady of Fatima revealed this to the public. Hell has many damned souls in it. It is a know fact or are you implying that Jesus’ mother would lie to people about that?
Good, it’s an important bedrock of any decent understanding of human nature. Most fundamentally, humans possess intrinsic dignity/worth/value/sanctity/sacredness. The book of Genesis just provides a metaphysical foundation for this truth (that it is derived from being a divine image-bearer). As such, a human can never be simply a means to an end. All humans are, as Kant recognized, ends in themselves and would be treated as such by any good agent acting in the cosmos (especially a divine one).I see people talking about the universal Imago Dei on these forums and in Catholic writings all the time
Sure, I would rather the whole world were Catholic (or Orthodox). That, however, is exceedingly implausible, so lumen gentium 16 was wise to acknowledge other possible routes of salvation (epistemically speaking).Plus, Christianity/Catholicism has never been intended to be a small and exclusive thing. We’re supposed to bring everybody in eventually, or try to (just as God wills to bring everyone to Heaven)
Perhaps. But I find that only a low-level relationship and perhaps a low-level consciousness would find such a warning effective. I need no threat from my children, parents, siblings, best friends, etc in order for me to love them and act for their good. Why would one need a warning from a Heavenly Father?Hell is a warning
Lol. It’s enough to know we’re in the presence of a higher consciousness. What a privilege. Thank you sir for being so kind as to swim in our muck.I can’t change your level of consciousness