Something different: a story

[brumano]

You bring up a fantastic point, and this is why I am leaning toward a developmental approach to theology. From the cross, Jesus forgave us (the crowd) unconditionally. He forgave an unrepentant crowd. This shows God’s unconditional love for us, the God who cares for us so much more than a sparrow, the God who has carved us into the palm of His hand. On the other hand, there is a lot to be said for an unrepentant person not being too comfortable with God’s forgiveness.

We could say there is no other approach to theology or our relationship to God other than developmental, because it is ongoing with a living God and we participate in that; what was done in Acts5 was an Act of the Holy Spirit in developing of that new, baby church, so I think without knowing all that we would need to know we just have to accept it as having been necessary to those purposes, at that time. To leave Acts5,1-11 behind I think it has to be agreed also that this was a problem that was brought into the church by those two persons who were husband and wife and not some case of the church going out and imposing itself where it did not belong.
God’s love is unconditional in that He is love, and in love there is the desire for the greatest of all good for the one('s) who is loved so a qualitative connotation of the word unconditional is pressed into this love realationship God has for us, remembering that He is the source of love; “He loved us before we loved Him.” This is the condition that we have to understand, God’s love gives us free will, even sometimes to choose evil; absolutely. You hit on one of these conditions in that last sentence and here’s another way of putting what you said; the only unforgivable sin is refusing God’s forgiveness. It’s hard but God seeks because He loves us for us to be perfect, in His eyes. Look at the story of Moses; faithful, trusting, self sacrificing, totally obedient, yet when him and Aaron get carried away with themselves in the dessert, they hurt God and God lets his feelings be known to them in unmistakable terms. The unconditional love of God is just that; He must be loved unconditionally as well.

I know that God forgives Peter, Ananias, Sapphira, and all of those involved because I myself have forgiven all of those involved. It is simply impossible for me to believe in a God who is less forgiving than I am. What I am saying is that forgiveness itself is an act of repentance meant not only for reconciliation, but to additionally free us from the slavery of the compulsion to punish, the compulsion for justice. After all, this is exactly what the crowd wanted, justice, and they hung Jesus in their compulsive automaticity. We all do this.
True, but isn’t it true because we would rather make others a scapegoat than admit our own wrongdoing, our own sin and need to be forgiven? Not just by others, but by God. I don’t think the crowd wanted justice, i don’t really want justice for my sins, I want mercy. We needed the one who was crucified to love us that much to be crucified and die for us, not just for him to say all is forgiven. It’s a great thing that you are forgiving as much as you are, because we know that God won’t be outdone in anything, especially in Mercy so I do get it, my point is that, God’s Mercy is in making us good and depending on the person that can be a very painful process. But it is all in God’s hands in the end and what He does is right.

In a nutshell, the person temporarily incapable of forgiving others can find some comprehensibility in the presentation of a God who is to be feared. Those who have totally forgiven the self and others find that an unconditionally loving and forgiving God is the only depiction of God that makes sense, there is no fear of God at all.

I guess I may be one of those people in that nutshell, I do fear God but this fear has somehow, i’m at a loss to explain has allowed me to trust in Him more truly. there’s a personal story that goes along with this, but mine aren’t of better value than yours or anybody else’s so i won’t add it here, all i will say though is from that day on i knew that i had to try to change the way i was living my life. I do like one of St. Ambrose’s comments on our subject, he said, what is it that causes me to fear? it is my sins.

So, the apparent contradictions in the gospel have their purpose. Empathy develops with experience; a person who has not learned to love, empathize, and forgive their enemy, for example, will find solace in the biblical presentation of a God who punishes their enemy. Those who have, at least for the moment, come to empathize with those who exhibit the worst behaviors will relate more to the forgiveness demonstrated from Golgotha

.
This is exactly right, this is where God’s Mercy poured fourth from the Heart of Jesus as a fountain of Mercy for us; but other things happened also in conjunction with this; the “ruler of the world was judged,” the law and the prophets, the covenants (at the resurrection) are all fullfilled. The Law is not removed, it is amplified; it is established perfectly forever. “Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word will not pass away.”

The Church, therefore, has a place for everyone: A place for those who fear God’s wrath, and a place for those who don’t believe in God’s wrath. A pastoral, inclusive approach would be to show the greatest respect for all spiritual phases.

I suppose I can’t argue with that and I agree with that by and large, that the church should be as all inclusive as it morally can be at all times.

[/QUOTE]

 

[OneSheep]

I continue to enjoy our conversation, brumano.

We could say there is no other approach to theology or our relationship to God other than developmental, because it is ongoing with a living God and we participate in that; what was done in Acts5 was an Act of the Holy Spirit in developing of that new, baby church, so I think without knowing all that we would need to know we just have to accept it as having been necessary to those purposes, at that time.

Obedience is a virtue. Dedication and respect to authority are virtues. It is rather obvious that I wrote the little story in the first place as a comparison, and I think that the vast majority of people would say that the king was in the wrong. I don’t think I could have changed much to make the story more parallel to Acts 5. So why would all the commentators and so many Christians think that what the king did was wrong, but Peter was right? We can go back to the virtues, and in addition we could add the mindset that the Bible is Truth and though it is a human document, all of its writings were inspired. The scripture scholar I mentioned earlier said in response to the question of taking the Bible literally: “Yes, you can take the Bible literally, unless it appears to conflict with something else in the Bible.”

Such a conflict occurs in the story of Ananias and Sapphira. Justification of Peter’s acts is understandable, and certainly follows the virtues, but there is also a place for those who find Peter’s acts against the couple revolting. We as Catholics are free to find detestable Peter’s actions, and we are also called to forgive. So, a “best” Catholic response is difficult to say. However, my thread here seeks to provide an alternative that has not entered the commentaries of any of the Bibles I have read, and I hope that what I present gives those who shared my revulsion an alternative to justification. In other words, it’s okay for a Christian to find what Peter did atrocious, and then apologetics would come from a stance of forgiveness. The modern human in a democratic society has more difficulty tolerating misbehavior in leadership, whether or not the leader believes he is following God’s will, and an inspired scribe writes about it, and inspired commentators add their notes.

God’s love is unconditional in that He is love, and in love there is the desire for the greatest of all good for the one('s) who is loved so a qualitative connotation of the word unconditional is pressed into this love realationship God has for us, remembering that He is the source of love; “He loved us before we loved Him.” This is the condition that we have to understand, God’s love gives us free will, even sometimes to choose evil; absolutely. You hit on one of these conditions in that last sentence and here’s another way of putting what you said; the only unforgivable sin is refusing God’s forgiveness.

This is not what I said, but I have heard a priest say this before. He stated it this way (paraphrased): The only unforgiveable sin is the refusal to acknowledge forgiveness. In this way, we have closed our mind to the Spirit altogether, we are refusing to love.

So, this lack of forgiveness is not in form of God’s refusal to forgive, such forgiveness is always there waiting. Instead, the sin lies in being totally closed-minded about forgiving others. The plain truth is that until we forgive all others, we don’t have access to the kingdom right here on earth! If we continue to harbor resentment against ourselves or others, or some aspect of ourselves or others, we carry around a resentment that blocks our fullest realization of gift of life, the gift of each other. By not forgiving, we block out life in the Kingdom here and now. So “unforgivable” has a very different meaning when we are discussing it in context. It has nothing to do with God’s unwillingness to forgive.

It’s hard but God seeks because He loves us for us to be perfect, in His eyes. Look at the story of Moses; faithful, trusting, self sacrificing, totally obedient, yet when him and Aaron get carried away with themselves in the dessert, they hurt God and God lets his feelings be known to them in unmistakable terms. The unconditional love of God is just that; He must be loved unconditionally as well.

I’d have to go back to the scripture to comment more, but in general when something in the OT talks about an angry or hurt God, I ascribe such to humans projecting their own emotions on God. God always forgives. God forgives our disobedience, infidelity to orthodoxy, and all other human behaviors, thoughts and actions. What is important in the time of Moses and Aaron was that their people remain obedient and cohesive, for the sake of survival of their own people. If it helped to say that God frowned on worship of other idols, then their depiction of a God who angers at such was a means to a good end, and was commendable. A good deal of this has to do with one’s own prayer life. Does God get angry? Does God punish idolatry? The answer lies in personal relationships.

(continued)

 

[OneSheep]

I don’t think the crowd wanted justice, i don’t really want justice for my sins, I want mercy. We needed the one who was crucified to love us that much to be crucified and die for us, not just for him to say all is forgiven. It’s a great thing that you are forgiving as much as you are, because we know that God won’t be outdone in anything, especially in Mercy so I do get it, my point is that, God’s Mercy is in making us good and depending on the person that can be a very painful process. But it is all in God’s hands in the end and what He does is right.

Well this is a matter of projection. If I were standing in the crowd demanding Jesus’ death, I wouldn’t be thinking in terms of scapegoating at all, I would be thinking in terms of a Guy who said some things that sounded very blasphemous (like forgiving enemies, even the Romans!), and the religious leaders I respect condemning Him. Justice meted in the form of crucifixion. I think that you are saying that if you were in the crowd, you would be thinking that Jesus was paying for your own sin. Or is that what you would be thinking?

I guess I may be one of those people in that nutshell, I do fear God but this fear has somehow, i’m at a loss to explain has allowed me to trust in Him more truly. there’s a personal story that goes along with this, but mine aren’t of better value than yours or anybody else’s so i won’t add it here, all i will say though is from that day on i knew that i had to try to change the way i was living my life. I do like one of St. Ambrose’s comments on our subject, he said, what is it that causes me to fear? it is my sins.

The fear is life-giving when it motivates our repentance. Such fear is a gift. And wow, my admiration for your respect and wisdom continues to grow. Yes, I agree, our theology stems from our experiences and personal histories. This is not “relativism”, or a justification of immoral behaviors. It is a factual statement based on the reality of the human condition. We believe in the God that we project.

My quote:

The Church, therefore, has a place for everyone: A place for those who fear God’s wrath, and a place for those who don’t believe in God’s wrath. A pastoral, inclusive approach would be to show the greatest respect for all spiritual phases.

Your response:

I suppose I can’t argue with that and I agree with that by and large, that the church should be as all inclusive as it morally can be at all times.

I think that is exactly what the modern Church does. A cynic would say that the Church does so in order to get the bucks from wherever she can. I give the benefit of the doubt; a pastoral approach is one that realizes that members can all love our Church and God, even when people have very differing opinions on matters. Such an approach reflects a God who loves and forgives unconditionally.

 

[brumano]

Well this is a matter of projection. If I were standing in the crowd demanding Jesus’ death, I wouldn’t be thinking in terms of scapegoating at all, I would be thinking in terms of a Guy who said some things that sounded very blasphemous (like forgiving enemies, even the Romans!), and the religious leaders I respect condemning Him. Justice meted in the form of crucifixion. I think that you are saying that if you were in the crowd, you would be thinking that Jesus was paying for your own sin. Or is that what you would be thinking?

We are all projected into that crowd are’nt we, because his death is for my sins and the sins of the whole world, not everyone in that crowd was shouting crucify him. We know there were some because Jesus meets the weeping women while carrying his cross up calvary, I’d best not diverge into something else here but the fact has to be plain, my sins were in His cross that He carried and was crucified on, so that I could receive this forgiveness. There were three groups in that crowd; one shouting crucify, one shouting no let him go, and another which may have been the larger part so confused, or more or less apathetic, or afraid that just stayed silent. I’m not sure which of those three groups I would have been in on that day but in the experiences of my life I have to acknowledge that I have been in all three at different times. What we have to look at at the trial of Jesus is something that is so terrible so disgusting but yet undeniably true in our personal nature that unless we were forced to look at it, we never would. Jesus was put before the crowd after Pilate had him beaten, scouraged viciously, mocked,spat on, with a crown of thorns forced into the top of his head. And he did this partly because he thought when the people saw him in this state, they would be moved with pity or empathy if you like and call for him to be let go. But they were not moved to pity, they were moved to hatred for him and that is why they drowned out all the other voices and pilate himself full of fear gave them what they wanted. There is no other way to see the crucifixion apart from the atonement for sins, that would be quite worse because that would nullify calvary, and if calvary is nullified so is Mercy, and i don’t think anyone progressive or traditional would want to go anywhere near there.

 

[OneSheep]

We are all projected into that crowd are’nt we, because his death is for my sins and the sins of the whole world, not everyone in that crowd was shouting crucify him. We know there were some because Jesus meets the weeping women while carrying his cross up calvary, I’d best not diverge into something else here but the fact has to be plain, my sins were in His cross that He carried and was crucified on, so that I could receive this forgiveness. There were three groups in that crowd; one shouting crucify, one shouting no let him go, and another which may have been the larger part so confused, or more or less apathetic, or afraid that just stayed silent. I’m not sure which of those three groups I would have been in on that day but in the experiences of my life I have to acknowledge that I have been in all three at different times.

 

[brumano]

We don’t know of the couple’s “allegiance with Satan”. They might have planned to use the withheld funds for the betterment of some others, who knows what, but we don’t really need to get into that kind of speculation. We can take the best-case scenario, and forgive them for that; then we can take the worst-case scenario, and forgive them for that.

Yes, I agree completely, though, about the need for all people to know right from wrong, as described by law. There would be no need for law or 10 commandments if everyone behaved from a standpoint of complete empathy for the other. Do you see what I am saying here? However, such empathy is not the case, our empathy is blocked in certain circumstances, thus the need for strict guidance. Empathy develops but is still blocked sometimes. Temporary blindness is an aspect of our nature.

There are other situations from scripture; old and new testaments that give us alot more contrast about this struggle between good and bad; it’s really a constant plot throughout, but staying in Acts we find that there was a well established and deeply imbedded cult of satanic followers in Judea, but, who knew? It’s just as surprising as Acts5,1-11. A large number of these cultists are converted and a voluntary public burning of idols and books takes place and the estimated price of those materials burned is a large sum of money.
The point is we don’t forgive by letting them just go on, that’s basically called enabling and it’s not really forgiveness.
One of St.Paul’s letters deals in part with a case of incest on the part of one of the church members, what he orders to be done with him wasn’t instant forgiveness and full reinstatement that is for sure. Go through the Gospels and the Epistles, even to the end in revealltion, you see it time and time again. Christ came for all of His purposes, not just for forgiveness of sins; as St Paul says in another place, he came to destroy the works of satan which are what; sin and death.

 

[brumano]

brumano;11165144:

There are other ways to look at the whole concept of atonement. I found this speech by Fr. Rohr that I liked, for example. Keep in mind that our Church makes a lot of room for differing opinions, and for very good reason. Our relationship with God develops over time, and our relationship with God changes temporarily as we suffer or experience the horrible.

A really interesting read thanks for providing it; I’m probably going to stay more in the Dominican corner on the subject of atonement probably needless to say, but look at the sheer biographical facts of St.Francis; he was in many ways well off, he was secure, he was intelligent; he could have simply developed a personal philosophy based on a Christian model of life and that I’m sure would have been a very good life for him to lead. But that’s not what he did, he loved Christ so much that he came to be himself a personification of Jesus, and Him crucified; that’s ultra radical love, not just evolved thinking.

 

[fred_conty]

I believe scripture did say that everything has its time.
A time to live and a time to die.
A time for dancing and a time for weeping.
A time for war and a time for peace.
etc.

Maybe this was the time when Peter needed to show his power, not his forgiveness, because it was the right time. The church just left its nest and was trying out its wings. Peter needed to be believed and his authority was important. This would say it loud and clear.

So as Judas was used in salvation history, so these two people were used to strengthen Peter’s authority. Maybe later in other circumstances Peter might have said ok you are forgiven. But the Spirit establishes at this time just who he is with, and who they should listen to.

If the couple were just brushed off, the point wouldn’t have been established.

Just a thought.

 

[OneSheep]

There are other situations from scripture; old and new testaments that give us alot more contrast about this struggle between good and bad; it’s really a constant plot throughout, but staying in Acts we find that there was a well established and deeply imbedded cult of satanic followers in Judea, but, who knew? It’s just as surprising as Acts5,1-11. A large number of these cultists are converted and a voluntary public burning of idols and books takes place and the estimated price of those materials burned is a large sum of money.
The point is we don’t forgive by letting them just go on, that’s basically called enabling and it’s not really forgiveness.

Forgiveness, by definition in our faith, does not include the action of enabling. That would be equating forgiveness with acquittal. I am not saying that Peter should not have reprimanded A & S, but I am saying that his forgiveness of them was not evident, and that commentators rationalizing Peter’s behavior, especially the cruel treatment of Sapphira, is a less fruitful approach at apologetics. The focus, for those of us turned off by his behavior, is to forgive Peter.

One of St.Paul’s letters deals in part with a case of incest on the part of one of the church members, what he orders to be done with him wasn’t instant forgiveness and full reinstatement that is for sure. Go through the Gospels and the Epistles, even to the end in revealltion, you see it time and time again. Christ came for all of His purposes, not just for forgiveness of sins; as St Paul says in another place, he came to destroy the works of satan which are what; sin and death.

Absolutely, repentance is extremely important. The king in my OP can be forgiven, but he is called to repent. We need to forgive our politicians, for example, but that does not erase our call to do everything we can peacefully do to stop their hurtful behaviors.

I think I am starting to sound a bit repetitive, but our posts are so far apart I can’t remember what’s been said. We obviously agree on the importance of repentance.

 

[OneSheep]

A really interesting read thanks for providing it; I’m probably going to stay more in the Dominican corner on the subject of atonement probably needless to say, but look at the sheer biographical facts of St.Francis; he was in many ways well off, he was secure, he was intelligent; he could have simply developed a personal philosophy based on a Christian model of life and that I’m sure would have been a very good life for him to lead. But that’s not what he did, he loved Christ so much that he came to be himself a personification of Jesus, and Him crucified; that’s ultra radical love, not just evolved thinking.

We are all personifications of Jesus. Hard to see that sometimes. St. Francis saw it. I am a little confused about “evolved thinking”. We both agree that our spiritualities are a product of our experiences. Perhaps our collective image of God has evolved.

I can respect your view of atonement.

 

[OneSheep]

I believe scripture did say that everything has its time.
A time to live and a time to die.
A time for dancing and a time for weeping.
A time for war and a time for peace.
etc.

Maybe this was the time when Peter needed to show his power, not his forgiveness, because it was the right time. The church just left its nest and was trying out its wings. Peter needed to be believed and his authority was important. This would say it loud and clear.

So as Judas was used in salvation history, so these two people were used to strengthen Peter’s authority. Maybe later in other circumstances Peter might have said ok you are forgiven. But the Spirit establishes at this time just who he is with, and who they should listen to.

If the couple were just brushed off, the point wouldn’t have been established.

Just a thought.

I do love that scripture, and I do think that it is understandable that Peter needed to do something. Peter could have very well shown his power and his forgiveness. Jesus always showed us His power and His forgiveness. (with some minor, debateable exceptions)

I will have to consider this, for a moment. Is there ever a time to avoid forgiveness? Hmmm. Is there ever a time to promote addiction? Is there ever a time to avoid repentance? Is there a time for doing unto others as we would have no one do to us? Why would we do such a thing?

On the other hand, avoiding forgiveness is understandable and forgiveable.

So, I am leaning toward the view that no, there is never a time to promote or avoid forgiveness. Even war can take place with forgiveness coming from both sides. It’s hard to imagine, but it is possible. Forgiveness from both sides is much more likely to lead to reconciliation.

And there is this, too: If there is ever a time that we are to avoid forgiveness, then all of us could cling to such examples for the rest of our lives. This is hardly the “kingdom” or the reconciliation that Jesus promoted. This is not loving our neighbor. This is not repentance from judging others.

Wow, thanks for the great challenge! I had to choose between two concepts I love: a time for everything, and forgiveness.

Can anyone who says the Lord’s prayer avoid forgiving or rationalize someone else’s unforgiveness? Well, yes we can. But only when we are blind. We are blind when we condemn people, just as the crowd did of Jesus. But we can also be blinded by our elevation of people we love and respect. It’s like, “My favorite politician can do no wrong.” I am reminded of what a wise priest once said to me: It is not to condemn or condone, but understand.

 

[fred_conty]

Let’s take Judas for an example. When he was at the last supper, did Jesus say to Judas I forgive you? As I recall, Jesus said at one point, “it would be better for that man never to have been born”. Jesus did let him know that He knew what Judas was about to do. But that isn’t forgiveness. Why then did Jesus let him do it, especially being one of the twelve? Because it was in the plan of salvation that Jesus die for our sins and Judas was in that plan. Yet Judas was still able to stop it had he wanted. But then that is the mystery of free will vs. salvation history.

There is also a spiritual teaching to be gleaned from this death sentence. “Be ready, for you know not the day nor the hour.” They weren’t ready for judgment…scary. So we must watch and be ready on a moments notice without warning.

Just a thought.

 

[brumano]

We are all personifications of Jesus. Hard to see that sometimes. St. Francis saw it. I am a little confused about “evolved thinking”. We both agree that our spiritualities are a product of our experiences. Perhaps our collective image of God has evolved.

I can respect your view of atonement.

Right, I’m just not up to your speed, we’ve already covered that and just to clarify the case of incest was in 1st Cor. not Acts. Let’s try one more from Acts and I really appreciate your patience with me, what about the young girl who was a fortune teller that kept following St. Paul, and she was demonically possessed but she was a slave and her owners plotted against St. Paul because he cast out her demons, and set her free?
Now bring this into the reality of our own time, there is a worldwide organization that engages in human trafficking, slavery of all types but no doubt prostitution is their main business; these are seriously evil people and I’m just as certain some of them keep a church membership as a cover. You know, what I’m asking is how do you deal with the pervasiveness and the virulence of evil, how do you fight it? how do you keep yourself and your loved ones protected from it? so on and so forth, I know we’ve already established you’re not talking about acquittal or that there is no difference between right and wrong; but to get right down to it this enemy doesn’t care if we forgive them or not, in fact they don’t want our forgiveness, that would mean that they were found out…what do we do?

 

[OneSheep]

Let’s take Judas for an example. When he was at the last supper, did Jesus say to Judas I forgive you? As I recall, Jesus said at one point, “it would be better for that man never to have been born”. Jesus did let him know that He knew what Judas was about to do. But that isn’t forgiveness. Why then did Jesus let him do it, especially being one of the twelve? Because it was in the plan of salvation that Jesus die for our sins and Judas was in that plan. Yet Judas was still able to stop it had he wanted. But then that is the mystery of free will vs. salvation history.

There is also a spiritual teaching to be gleaned from this death sentence. “Be ready, for you know not the day nor the hour.” They weren’t ready for judgment…scary. So we must watch and be ready on a moments notice without warning.

Just a thought.

Ooooo - your “thoughts” so gently cut to the quick!

So, why did Jesus say that? I don’t know. Perhaps Jesus was referring to the suicidal anguish that Judas would soon experience. But did Jesus refrain from forgiving? We don’t know that. I believe He did Why would He not? He forgave the people who crucified Him, but not Judas? Isn’t this the guy who said we are to forgive 70 times 7?

Have you forgiven Judas?

There is a big difference between the way that Jesus treated Judas (acceptance) and the way that the King treated his subjects in the story I presented.

 

[OneSheep]

Right, I’m just not up to your speed, we’ve already covered that and just to clarify the case of incest was in 1st Cor. not Acts. Let’s try one more from Acts and I really appreciate your patience with me, what about the young girl who was a fortune teller that kept following St. Paul, and she was demonically possessed but she was a slave and her owners plotted against St. Paul because he cast out her demons, and set her free?
Now bring this into the reality of our own time, there is a worldwide organization that engages in human trafficking, slavery of all types but no doubt prostitution is their main business; these are seriously evil people and I’m just as certain some of them keep a church membership as a cover. You know, what I’m asking is how do you deal with the pervasiveness and the virulence of evil, how do you fight it? how do you keep yourself and your loved ones protected from it? so on and so forth, I know we’ve already established you’re not talking about acquittal or that there is no difference between right and wrong; but to get right down to it this enemy doesn’t care if we forgive them or not, in fact they don’t want our forgiveness, that would mean that they were found out…what do we do?

Our church teaches that forgiveness is for us, not the other. So, it is important that we forgive human traffickers, for our own spiritual well-being and wholeness (holiness).

Other than that, aren’t we doing what we can? We can forgive and subject violators to jail and other consequences in order to get the situation under control. Like I said, Peter could have openly chastised the couple, and still forgiven them. Don’t parents do as much?

But not telling the wife that her husband had died? And implying that he was sending people to their death by the works of the Spirit? Because they changed their minds about how much they were giving, and then lied about it? This was certainly starting the Church with the wrong foot.

I wonder how many followers stopped believing? Well, probably none. The people were subject to much worse from Caesar and his minions; they were used to tyranny.

The Spirit of Unconditional Love is One that asks for, demands, our repentance. But judgment and anger, too, are to be repented.

… opportunity for forgiveness of Peter…

 

[fred_conty]

Ooooo - your “thoughts” so gently cut to the quick!

So, why did Jesus say that? I don’t know. Perhaps Jesus was referring to the suicidal anguish that Judas would soon experience. But did Jesus refrain from forgiving? We don’t know that. I believe He did Why would He not? He forgave the people who crucified Him, but not Judas? Isn’t this the guy who said we are to forgive 70 times 7?

Have you forgiven Judas?

There is a big difference between the way that Jesus treated Judas (acceptance) and the way that the King treated his subjects in the story I presented.

70 X 7 = forgiveness if someone is willing to accept it. And that is the problem, not everyone is willing to accept it. It isn’t that they were not offered forgiveness, as in the case of Judas, when Jesus warned him, “it would be better for that man not to have been born”.

It just seems that if God offers forgiveness and that forgiveness is automatically effective, then hell dosen’t exist for humans. But the forgiveness to do its job, requires it to be accepted.

As far as Judas goes or anyone else, we all must pray that noone makes that awefull choice, for it is just too horrible to even emagine eternal torture without any interruption. So our prayers can change that so that others will accept the mercy of Jesus, even the worst of the worst.

“Jesus, have mercy on us.”

 

[brumano]

Our church teaches that forgiveness is for us, not the other. So, it is important that we forgive human traffickers, for our own spiritual well-being and wholeness (holiness).

lots a problems with that i can’t forgive someone for something they did to someone else can i; so if in your spirituality i sit in my nice safe world all my own and think i now forgive all these terrible offenders of all kinds, i actually commit a lie because the people who were tortured, enslaved, subjected to unimaginable evil are the ones who have the right to forgive them or not, not me and i don’t want someone else trying to forgive what’s been done to me as if it were their place to do so. My spiritual well being and wholeness work more along those lines, and like i said don’t tell them you forgive them because they will tear you to pieces.

Other than that, aren’t we doing what we can? We can forgive and

 

[OneSheep]

70 X 7 = forgiveness if someone is willing to accept it. And that is the problem, not everyone is willing to accept it. It isn’t that they were not offered forgiveness, as in the case of Judas, when Jesus warned him, “it would be better for that man not to have been born”.

It just seems that if God offers forgiveness and that forgiveness is automatically effective, then hell dosen’t exist for humans. But the forgiveness to do its job, requires it to be accepted.

This works for me. That is, for reconciliation to take place, there has to be some movement from the forgiven. The only possible contradiction might be if forgiveness is only offered on condition of acceptance, which goes against the idea of an unconditionally loving God.

God forgives, and offers forgiveness, uncondtionally, an infinite number of times.

The Catholic priest whose Bible study I went to the most said that he believed people only go to hell “kicking and screaming against God the whole way.” I don’t believe anyone goes to a place of eternal damnation. People don’t make such decisions when the options are clear.

I still don’t know what Jesus meant when He said that it would be better if (Judas) had never been born. I already mentioned a possibility that was not a threat or condemnation.

As far as Judas goes or anyone else, we all must pray that noone makes that awefull choice, for it is just too horrible to even emagine eternal torture without any interruption. So our prayers can change that so that others will accept the mercy of Jesus, even the worst of the worst.

“Jesus, have mercy on us.”

I find it hard to believe that anyone would choose an eternal torture. On the other hand, plenty of people choose the hell of addiction and other enslavements daily. They do so because they do not know what they are doing.

It says a lot of your own spirituality that Jesus offers mercy to the “worst of the worst”. We are definitely on the same page there.

 

[OneSheep]

lots a problems with that i can’t forgive someone for something they did to someone else can i; so if in your spirituality i sit in my nice safe world all my own and think i now forgive all these terrible offenders of all kinds, i actually commit a lie because the people who were tortured, enslaved, subjected to unimaginable evil are the ones who have the right to forgive them or not, not me and i don’t want someone else trying to forgive what’s been done to me as if it were their place to do so. My spiritual well being and wholeness work more along those lines, and like i said don’t tell them you forgive them because they will tear you to pieces.

 

[fred_conty]

This works for me. That is, for reconciliation to take place, there has to be some movement from the forgiven. The only possible contradiction might be if forgiveness is only offered on condition of acceptance, which goes against the idea of an unconditionally loving God.

God forgives, and offers forgiveness, uncondtionally, an infinite number of times.

The Catholic priest whose Bible study I went to the most said that he believed people only go to hell “kicking and screaming against God the whole way.” I don’t believe anyone goes to a place of eternal damnation. People don’t make such decisions when the options are clear.

I still don’t know what Jesus meant when He said that it would be better if (Judas) had never been born. I already mentioned a possibility that was not a threat or condemnation.

I find it hard to believe that anyone would choose an eternal torture. On the other hand, plenty of people choose the hell of addiction and other enslavements daily. They do so because they do not know what they are doing.

It says a lot of your own spirituality that Jesus offers mercy to the “worst of the worst”. We are definitely on the same page there.

“I don’t believe anyone goes to a place of eternal damnation. People don’t make such decisions when the options are clear.” That is a good point you bring up.

Just how clear are the decisions we make during and after death? Decisions can be swayed by our emotions or our trained way of thinking. How will the human soul be presented with eternity? Maybe it may be they are presented with the thought of chosing to be with Jesus or away from Jesus, and not so much of heaven or hell. If the person hasn’t thought much about Jesus in life, then why would they want to chose him in death? And even more so if they act as if sin was a non event. Maybe the test each will go thru will be different then the picture we have visualized it to be. Not so much about heaven or hell, but about another choice which will bring its own result.

In this case, the good priest might have a point. For once they understood what choice they made, then it is that they would object and begin screaming against their choice.

But then maybe this isn’t the scenerio. But can anyone afford to be wrong?

The church asks us to pray for sinners. It is asking us to be merciful to those who don’t know any better. And there are so many reasons why they may not know better. And if they don’t know any better now, then there is there any reason to suspect that when they die they will know better? But the church seems to think that our prayers make a big difference in their choice of turning things around in their life, in order, that when they die, they will make the right choice.

May God bless and keep you. May God’s face shine on you. May God be kind to you and give you peace.