The denial of Hell-by Christians?

[SteveVH]

But unfortunately my friend,many still believe they are going to Heaven regardless of the life they choose to live.

On that point I agree with you completley. One of those subtle lies that the enemy still whispers in our ears which is why the Fatima messages were given to us.

 

[PAboy57]

Read the verses I’ve quoted (Romans 5:18, 1 Corinthians 15:22, and Colossians 1:19-20. As to what I’ve said about saints and Church Fathers, it is well known that both St. Gregory of Nazianzus and St. Gregory of Nyssa (both were bishops, both were saints, both were Fathers of the Church) tended towards universal salvation. As I stated before in a previous post, I don’t mean to sound intellectually snobbish, but I’m not just making up these claims about St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. I have a Master of Divinity and a Master of Theology in Historical Theology. Of course, just because these saints and Church Fathers made these claims doesn’t prove that they are true. My point is that my position is not mine alone and that before you go condemning those who currently hold this position, realize that you need to condemn some saints, bishops, and Church Fathers along with them.

Hey Ryan,

Thanks for the information. I look forward to reading their opinions.

God Bless

 

[Steven_John]

Richard Dawkins, will he be in heaven?
He makes an excellent example of The Catholic Church teaching on invincible ignorance.

Will God change and remove free will?

Best we continue to love him by living in hope for him.

Bless ya

 

[Nicea325]

Read the verses I’ve quoted (Romans 5:18, 1 Corinthians 15:22, and Colossians 1:19-20. As to what I’ve said about saints and Church Fathers, it is well known that both St. Gregory of Nazianzus and St. Gregory of Nyssa (both were bishops, both were saints, both were Fathers of the Church) tended towards universal salvation. As I stated before in a previous post, I don’t mean to sound intellectually snobbish, but I’m not just making up these claims about St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. I have a Master of Divinity and a Master of Theology in Historical Theology. Of course, just because these saints and Church Fathers made these claims doesn’t prove that they are true. My point is that my position is not mine alone and that before you go condemning those who currently hold this position, realize that you need to condemn some saints, bishops, and Church Fathers along with them.

Okay you have a Masters in Theology? And? I have my MBA/GM and Masters in History. And?

Well I got news for you,the belief you hold to was formally condemned in the first of the famous anathemas pronounced at the Council of Constantinople in 543: Ei tis ten teratode apokatastasis presbeuei anathema esto [See, also, Justinian, Liber adversus Originem, anathemas 7 and 9.] The doctrine/belief was acknowledged as heterodox by the Church. It was held strongly in the East,which usually was riddled with heresies.

St. Augustine protested more strongly than any other writer against an error so contrary to the doctrine of the necessity of grace. Finally,St. Gregory of Nazianzus as well; “De seipso”, 566 (P.G., XXXVII, col. 1010), though he asks the question, finally decides neither for nor against it, but rather leaves the answer to God.However, it is not clear or universally accepted that Gregory held to the doctrine of apocatastasis.

 

[rinnie]

Here are some more passages from Holy Scripture that support universal salvation.

“Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.” Romans 5:18

“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” 1 Corinthians 15:22

“For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.” Colossians 1:19-29

Ryan here is where I think you and I can agree, but then have to disagree. Yes we were all guaranteed Salvation through Baptism, and got it also when we were baptised. But you are speaking of original sin.

Adam lost us salvation, and Christ got it back for us. But what about actual sin now. That is where I thing you are confusing original sin and actual sin.

What Romans meant was Adam did lose us Salvation, but Christ came and got it back and paid for all sins. And by Christ dying on the cross we were all rid of original sin once and for all.

But now he left us the Church to reconcile ourself back with him through the Church, we didn’t have that before. Now we do. Confession, the Sacraments are what he left us. He left us himself in the Church to continue his work for us.

 

[rinnie]

Richard Dawkins, will he be in heaven?
He makes an excellent example of The Catholic Church teaching on invincible ignorance.

Will God change and remove free will?

Best we continue to love him by living in hope for him.

Bless ya

Let’s speak of ignorance. Do you think that God gave us free will for a reason? Why would he remove free will? If he did not give us free will why did he put us here in the first place. We would be like computer, run on a program per say.

God created us for one reason. To live for him and to Love him and oneanother. But if he removed our free will how could we choose him then?

If you want to call the teaching of the Holy Spirit invincible ignorance I feel sorry for you. That is all I can say. Jesus promised his Apostles that he would send the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth. The Pope and Bishops in succession can prove from History that they have preserved his teachings.

He promised them the gift of the Holy Spriit he said when they teach it will be his words, and they will have his mind to teach. He said the gates of hades would never prevail over his Church, So you are either calling Christ a liar, or you have alot of explaining to do,

 

[rinnie]

And some of those who have taught universal salvation were bishops and early teachers of the Church. It seems to me that a reading of Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15, and Colossians 1 shows that one of those early teachers of the Church who taught the possibility of universal salvation was St. Paul the Apostle.

Okay Ryan here is the first thing you should learn when you study scripture. Scripture must line up with scripture. Now what you are saying is St Paul is contradicting himself. Now either St Paul is contradicting himself or you are not understanding scripture. Now we know St Paul is not contradicting himself.

To say it is possible for all to get to heaven is true, we have to live the commandments. Agreed. But to say something is possible does not mean it is going to happen or guaranteed, Because if that were true this would be a perfect world, And this world is proof its not happening.

Scripture CANNOT contradict Scripture. St Paul said he is living his life out in fear and trembeling now how is that saying he is guaranteed salvation? Answer that first.

 

[RyanBlack]

Okay you have a Masters in Theology? And? I have my MBA/GM and Masters in History. And?

Well I got news for you,the belief you hold to was formally condemned in the first of the famous anathemas pronounced at the Council of Constantinople in 543: Ei tis ten teratode apokatastasis presbeuei anathema esto [See, also, Justinian, Liber adversus Originem, anathemas 7 and 9.] The doctrine/belief was acknowledged as heterodox by the Church. It was held strongly in the East,which usually was riddled with heresies.

St. Augustine protested more strongly than any other writer against an error so contrary to the doctrine of the necessity of grace. Finally,St. Gregory of Nazianzus as well; “De seipso”, 566 (P.G., XXXVII, col. 1010), though he asks the question, finally decides neither for nor against it, but rather leaves the answer to God.However, it is not clear or universally accepted that Gregory held to the doctrine of apocatastasis.

I am well aware of the anathemas against Origen at the Council of Constantinople (in 553, not 543). I also hold to the belief that what got the particular apocastasis of Origen condemned (while certain others who held to a belief in universal salavation have not been condemned) was that Origen imposed it upon God as a necessity. Unlike Origen, I do not understand universal salvation as an imposition or necessity imposed upon God.

“The East,which was usually riddled with heresies.” I ask you, and the West was not? As an Eastern Christian, I find your implication to be offensive. You are aware, are you not, that Arianism, while it arose in the East, endured in the West far longer then it did in the East? And of course, the West has not been immune to the rise of its own heresies.

As to the teaching of Augustine, I disagree. A belief in universal salvation does not preclude, and is not in opposition to the doctrine of the necessity of grace. I believe that will ultimately be saved and that it will happen only by the grace of God offered through the saving mysteries of Our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ.

As to my credentials, both you and Rinnie have either misunderstood or purposefully twisted why I have stated them (I hope it is the former, but at this point, I rather think the latter). I am not stating my credentials in an attempt to suggest that anyone should accept or disagree with the conclusions I reach. Rather, I have stated them so that people will know that I’m not lacking in knowledge about the Scriptural and historical issues at work and that I’m not just making things up as I go. So please, don’t think or try to suggest that it is my intent to bully people into thinking that I must be write because I have a theological education–because it is not.

Finally, let me make three additional things clear. I know very well what actual, offical Roman Catholic teaching on the matter is. I’m quite familiar with the first seven Ecumenical Councils. I am not in need of having them explained to me. Furthermore, I am also very familiar with the CCC. I know what official Church teaching is. And for this reason, were I a catechist, or a theology teacher in a Catholic school (including colleges or seminaries), or a deacon or priest, I would never teach univeral salvation, since I believe that I have no right or authority to teach what is not taught by the Church. And at last, it is not my intent in this thread to convert you, or Rinnie, or anyone else to my thinking on this matter. I have participated in this thread in an effort to explain that universalism is not a recent innovation and that its adherents are not necessarily infrequent in our Church attendance and ignorant of Church teaching. We may ultimately be wrong on this matter (a possibility I always acknowledge), but please don’t stereotype us or assume we are ignorant.

 

[RyanBlack]

Okay Ryan here is the first thing you should learn when you study scripture. Scripture must line up with scripture. Now what you are saying is St Paul is contradicting himself. Now either St Paul is contradicting himself or you are not understanding scripture. Now we know St Paul is not contradicting himself.

To say it is possible for all to get to heaven is true, we have to live the commandments. Agreed. But to say something is possible does not mean it is going to happen or guaranteed, Because if that were true this would be a perfect world, And this world is proof its not happening.

Scripture CANNOT contradict Scripture. St Paul said he is living his life out in fear and trembeling now how is that saying he is guaranteed salvation? Answer that first.

Do you honestly think that I am so stupid that I don’t know that “Scripture must line up with Scripture.” Please spare me the condescending tone. You believe that the Scriptures that teach the possibility of eternal damnation for some get priority over those that offer hope of universal redemption. I do not.

 

[Usagi]

I am well aware of the anathemas against Origen at the Council of Constantinople (in 553, not 543). I also hold to the belief that what got the particular apocastasis of Origen condemned (while certain others who held to a belief in universal salavation have not been condemned) was that Origen imposed it upon God as a necessity. Unlike Origen, I do not understand universal salvation as an imposition or necessity imposed upon God.

That may be the key. As I understand it, the Church still permits, as a matter of theological opinion, the belief that all may be saved. Jesus’ words about the wide and narrow ways do not oblige us to believe that the great majority of all humanity will ultimately be damned. Certainly we should hope and pray for the salvation of every soul, even if we must hold out hope of a last-second internal repentance. The idea here is that one is basically hoping for the ultimate “happy ending” – which, given God’s universal salvific will and human free will, must be admitted as at least a possibility – rather than denying that damnation for some is also a possibility.

The universalism that is condemned (again, as I understand it) is the belief that all will definitively be saved. As in Origen’s case, this may mean that even Satan will eventually be brought back into the fold, and that Hell may exist but is not a permanent state. The Church teachings potentially being denied in this case are 1) that damnation is a real possibility for human beings; 2) that damnation, once it occurs, is irreversible; and 3) that the fallen angels are already in the damned state.

It sounds, so far, as though you are arguing more the first position than the second. I could be wrong, though.

Usagi

 

[rinnie]

Hi. Universal salvation refers to the belief that ultimately, everyone will be saved.

Okay Ryan this is what you said. Now to say U niv. Sal. is that everyone WILL be saved is completely different then saying you pray that all will or CAN be saved.

Now what are you saying now? Did the Saints teach that everyone WILL be saved, or did they believe that everyone COULD be saved.

We all have the opportunity to be saved. That is not in conflict with the teaching of the CC. But the teaching is not all will.

I believe that we can all be saved and I know I am right. SImply because Jesus made it possible for us. But why are you so angry with me.

You are saying St, Paul taught this and he did not. I asked for the scripture and you are showing me Original sin, not acutal sin. Show me where St Paul said we are all saved from Actual sin, St Paul taught that we are saved by Grace and Faith and good works. Yes he also taught we are saved ONCE and for all from ORIGINAL sin by Baptism but once we choose to sin we lose that grace. Please show me otherwise. I have asked you and you continue to show me original sin not actual.

Please show me where he taught we cannot lose our salvation by our actual sin if we do not repent and confess. Show me this scriputure. Thats all I ask.

 

[rinnie]

Do you honestly think that I am so stupid that I don’t know that “Scripture must line up with Scripture.” Please spare me the condescending tone. You believe that the Scriptures that teach the possibility of eternal damnation for some get priority over those that offer hope of universal redemption. I do not.

I am not being condescending, please forgive me if it seemed that way, It was not my intention.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I do not understand universal salvation as an imposition or necessity imposed upon God.

Ryan, your education and belief is not being ridiculed defiantely not by me anyway. And I would hope we are OK on this point. I’m trying to gain a beter perspective and insight.

Nonetheless, what my point is, as I was stating earlier, Paul has always been one of favorite apostles. I always could relate to him since in college I was on Scholarship, lived in Animal House and was a sinner. I figure if Paul could be saved, I certainly wasn’t hopeless. I believe the specific referrence you made to Paul in Romans and Corinthians is significant. And do indicate a knowledge of Bible. Paul probes some of the deepest truths of our faith, including the nature of true love and the difficulty of living morally in a fallen word. And we do need to pay close attention to this.

So let us use Pauls words to bring us together in true love of each other as Christians and to be able to communicate on an equal ground. And leave petty differences aside.

The Bible does not teach that all people are Gods children. Rather it is clear in Romans and other NT writting, we become sons and daughters of God, being adoped by Him when we put our Faith in Jesus Christ. We see this idea at the start of Johns gospel. “To those who believe in Christs name, He gave the right to become children of God” [1:12]. The word we translate as “adoption” is “huiothesia”, literally “son-making” Adoption is both present and future. We are already sons and daughters of God, but we come into our inheritance only after death as Christians.

We have to look at Paul as being the most traveled of all the Apostles. So the effort to bring Christs message wasn’t to promote anything by “One Teaching” which was the one and only message of Christ given to the Apostles. Pauls description of decadence in pagan life in Romans-1 is no exaggeration. Even the Romans were appauled by the immorality. Unwanted babies aborted or abandoned after birth left to die or be eaten by dogs, raised to be prostitute’s, than being loved as sons and daughters. Woman of upper class divorced at will and joked about their number of husbands. The Roman empire was a den of iniquity. And while Pauls words about homosexuality and its condemnation today provoke controvery, our period of time is not much different. And we could easily compare today to that empire if we clearly understand that empire. Is the USA so different today?

Anyway I can’t in good consciousness debate that one in the eastern church may not be a great Christian, and may well be a better Christian than many Catholics who are in fact lukewarm.

When we speak Universal Church. I don’t think we should be so quick to dismiss this concept. In fact if we had to develope a B-Plan for survival of the Catholic/Orthodox Church for end times [which many believe we should already be doing]. The Universal Church would be the model based on early Christian teaching of the Apostles and Bible. And especially Paul since He left us with a wealth of teaching and insight.

There are many Catholic Jesuits “Society of Jesus or SJ” today who clearly believe we have walked way to far to the end of the night. And true Christianity need be preserved in the underground universal church. Which btw already exists. In case anarchy becomes the way of life, and total enslavement by satan prevails. And btw slavery is higher today than any time in human history. And history is the war of good and evil. Saying we win in the end, doesn’t take in to account the loss we will endure?

This isn’t to say I don’t believe in the Apostolic Succession of Peter in Rome. But I do say lets not condemn our other brothers in Christianity. They may well be the ones we build Christs church together with in the end. God said the gates of Hell would never prevail against His church. Yet its also a truth that 2500 different religions simply are not realistic in the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. One path to God, there can be no other way.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Ryan, your education and belief is not being ridiculed defiantely not by me anyway. And I would hope we are OK on this point. I’m trying to gain a beter perspective and insight.

Nonetheless, what my point is, as I was stating earlier, Paul has always been one of favorite apostles. I always could relate to him since in college I was on Scholarship, lived in Animal House and was a sinner. I figure if Paul could be saved, I certainly wasn’t hopeless. I believe the specific referrence you made to Paul in Romans and Corinthians is significant. And do indicate a knowledge of Bible. Paul probes some of the deepest truths of our faith, including the nature of true love and the difficulty of living morally in a fallen word. And we do need to pay close attention to this.

So let us use Pauls words to bring us together in true love of each other as Christians and to be able to communicate on an equal ground. And leave petty differences aside.

The Bible does not teach that all people are Gods children. Rather it is clear in Romans and other NT writting, we become sons and daughters of God, being adoped by Him when we put our Faith in Jesus Christ. We see this idea at the start of Johns gospel. “To those who believe in Christs name, He gave the right to become children of God” [1:12]. The word we translate as “adoption” is “huiothesia”, literally “son-making” Adoption is both present and future. We are already sons and daughters of God, but we come into our inheritance only after death as Christians.

We have to look at Paul as being the most traveled of all the Apostles. So the effort to bring Christs message wasn’t to promote anything by “One Teaching” which was the one and only message of Christ given to the Apostles. Pauls description of decadence in pagan life in Romans-1 is no exaggeration. Even the Romans were appauled by the immorality. Unwanted babies aborted or abandoned after birth left to die or be eaten by dogs, raised to be prostitute’s, than being loved as sons and daughters. Woman of upper class divorced at will and joked about their number of husbands. The Roman empire was a den of iniquity. And while Pauls words about homosexuality and its condemnation today provoke controvery, our period of time is not much different. And we could easily compare today to that empire if we clearly understand that empire. Is the USA so different today?

Anyway I can’t in good consciousness debate that one in the eastern church may not be a great Christian, and may well be a better Christian than many Catholics who are in fact lukewarm.

When we speak Universal Church. I don’t think we should be so quick to dismiss this concept. In fact if we had to develope a B-Plan for survival of the Catholic/Orthodox Church for end times [which many believe we should already be doing]. The Universal Church would be the model based on early Christian teaching of the Apostles and Bible. And especially Paul since He left us with a wealth of teaching and insight.

There are many Catholic Jesuits “Society of Jesus or SJ” today who clearly believe we have walked way to far to the end of the night. And true Christianity need be preserved in the underground universal church. Which btw already exists. In case anarchy becomes the way of life, and total enslavement by satan prevails. And btw slavery is higher today than any time in human history. And history is the war of good and evil. Saying we win in the end, doesn’t take in to account the loss we will endure?

This isn’t to say I don’t believe in the Apostolic Succession of Peter in Rome. But I do say lets not condemn our other brothers in Christianity. They may well be the ones we build Christs church together with in the end. God said the gates of Hell would never prevail against His church. Yet its also a truth that 2500 different religions simply are not realistic in the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. One path to God, there can be no other way.

GaryTaylor,

I appreciate your post so very much.

Anna

 

[Nicea325]

I am well aware of the anathemas against Origen at the Council of Constantinople (in 553, not 543). I also hold to the belief that what got the particular apocastasis of Origen condemned (while certain others who held to a belief in universal salavation have not been condemned) was that Origen imposed it upon God as a necessity. Unlike Origen, I do not understand universal salvation as an imposition or necessity imposed upon God.

Sorry, I typed the year 543 instead of 553. So in other words, we agree God does not force or impose salvation on people? People must cooperate with Him-correct? God gave us like the angels,the gift of free-will.

“The East,which was usually riddled with heresies.” I ask you, and the West was not?

Did not imply to say the West was not and did not have heresies. Still does today and always will be heresies. I’ll give you one: the belief of one does not neeed to go to Mass.

As an Eastern Christian, I find your implication to be offensive. You are aware, are you not, that Arianism, while it arose in the East, endured in the West far longer then it did in the East? And of course, the West has not been immune to the rise of its own heresies

.

I am sorry,but I was not trying to offend you or the beautiful Eastern Church. I am very aware of the fact it endured in the West,but it does not change the fact it commenced in the East (it is only an emphasis,but not insult).

As to the teaching of Augustine, I disagree. A belief in universal salvation does not preclude, and is not in opposition to the doctrine of the necessity of grace.

Well I am not sure Augustine agrees with you.So does that mean the fallen angels will be saved as well?

I believe that will ultimately be saved and that it will happen only by the grace of God offered through the saving mysteries of Our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ.

So there is hope for Lucifer and the fallen angels?

As to my credentials, both you and Rinnie have either misunderstood or purposefully twisted why I have stated them (I hope it is the former, but at this point, I rather think the latter). I am not stating my credentials in an attempt to suggest that anyone should accept or disagree with the conclusions I reach. Rather, I have stated them so that people will know that I’m not lacking in knowledge about the Scriptural and historical issues at work and that I’m not just making things up as I go. So please, don’t think or try to suggest that it is my intent to bully people into thinking that I must be write because I have a theological education–because it is not.

I understand and admire and respect your education. I too have my degrees and consider myself an educated man. However, one does not need intelligence to have faith or experience conversion. I know you are not making things up,we never said you did. However, let us not forget, it is about the truth. Again, I respect your degrees and admire you are an educated man.

Finally, let me make three additional things clear. I know very well what actual, offical Roman Catholic teaching on the matter is. I’m quite familiar with the first seven Ecumenical Councils. I am not in need of having them explained to me. Furthermore, I am also very familiar with the CCC. I know what official Church teaching is. And for this reason, were I a catechist, or a theology teacher in a Catholic school (including colleges or seminaries), or a deacon or priest, I would never teach univeral salvation, since I believe that I have no right or authority to teach what is not taught by the Church. And at last, it is not my intent in this thread to convert you, or Rinnie, or anyone else to my thinking on this matter. I have participated in this thread in an effort to explain that universalism is not a recent innovation and that its adherents are not necessarily infrequent in our Church attendance and ignorant of Church teaching. We may ultimately be wrong on this matter (a possibility I always acknowledge), but please don’t stereotype us or assume we are ignorant.

Nicely said. And please understand I have never said you were ignorant or assumed you were ignorant.

 

[DENNYINMI]

Well, in the other post the poster stated that those dead for whom noone is praying, won’t make it from purgatory to heaven, but from there to hell (or they even go directly to hell after dying!)

So my question was: Do then ALL Protestants, in your opinion, go to hell? Because Protestants don’t belive in Purgatory! - Thus noone is prying for them when they are dead!°

Praying for the Living is something different (also in Light of Mt 22,32; Mk 12,27; Lk 20,38 or Mt 8,22; Lk 9,60). Protestants do that very often - with the firm believe that God will hear them!
But you’ll never ever see a Protestant* ('Though I am not sure about the so called “High Protestants” here! Please tell me if I thus generalize!)* praying for their dead.
Either, in their believe (and mine), you make it to heaven by accepting Jesus Christ as your Saviour and are baptised in His (Trinitarian) name, or you don’t when you reject Him purposfully. There is no middle-way.

Because someone does not “believe” in something…does not make it not so!
Even the bible speaks of a “third heaven”…do we know all the answers? Heavens, no! But we do believe that there were many things that were not written in Scripture, it is stated in Scripture, that if everything that was spoken was written, it could not be all contained…that is why we do not believe in Sola Scriptura…we have a Magesterium that teaches…is Apostolic, and we believe!

Why should we have any concerns regarding “hell” as believers, if we are working out our salvation with fear and trembling…Jesus is there to help us…the whole way!

 

[fred_conty]

In reference to Gregory of Nazianzen talking of the universality of all being saved, see
www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm, which says:

But the suspicions that have been cast on some passages of Gregory of Nazianzus and Jerome are decidedly without justification (cf. Pesch, “Theologische Zeitfragen”, 2nd series, 190 sqq.).

Someone asked about the meaning of Christ being lifted up to draw all men to Himself.
According to Catherine of Sienna, it meant that He chose that way to suffer and die so that even the hardest of the hardest of men would see his suffering and be moved to accept Him. So that not even one would be lost. I’m not sure of the exact words she used, but this is close.

Again someone asked about others going to hell other than Catholics. As far as I am aware, the Church as always said that other Christians in good faith (will) seeking the truth and following it as they know it, will be saved. This holds true even for others not Christian as long as they are doing what they perceive as the will of God and pursue it.
However having said that, noone knows they will go to heaven for certain. And if a person has committed a serious crime(sin) without adequate repentance before death, this will
also exclude them from eternal happiness.

I don’t want to get to windy here, but there was one more item: praying for the dead.
The Catholic teaching is that the soul (spirit) does not die at human death, but that it continues to exist, and never dies. We believe that judgement takes place at the moment of death and the soul of the person either goes to heaven, purgatory, or hell. Those in heaven or hell, we do not pray for, because in heaven they do not need our prayers, and in hell they would not benefit from our prayers. Those in purgatory we pray for because they are in suffering before going to heaven. We pray for everyone in purgatory, all faiths, all peoples, all nationalities, without any exception of any kind. There is a lot more that could be said but I’m getting too long.

"…love everyone, especially the brethern.’ Paul, convert and murderer.

 

[Steven_John]

Let’s speak of ignorance. Do you think that God gave us free will for a reason? Why would he remove free will? If he did not give us free will why did he put us here in the first place. We would be like computer, run on a program per say.,

Amen

God created us for one reason. To live for him and to Love him and oneanother. But if he removed our free will how could we choose him then?

Amen

If you want to call the teaching of the Holy Spirit invincible ignorance I feel sorry for you.

Where did that come from? are you ok or do you have some other unrelated issues you want to share? If you choose to connect Her teaching on invincible ignorance to being the teaching of The Holy spirit then the question would be rightly directed at you not me.
I see Her teaching on invincible ignorance as our trying to understand the mercy of God but made no reference in what you have quoted.

That is all I can say. Jesus promised his Apostles that he would send the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth. The Pope and Bishops in succession can prove from History that they have preserved his teachings.

Then understand from this that when Yahooshua (pbwh) is narrated on the cross as asking God to forgive the ignorance of men is the basis of Her teaching. You have not supported YOUR suggestion that i call the teaching of the Holy Spirit invincible ignorance. All you have done is spouted understanding un supporting of your suggestion.

He promised them the gift of the Holy Spriit he said when they teach it will be his words, and they will have his mind to teach. He said the gates of hades would never prevail over his Church,

Amen

So you are either calling Christ a liar, or you have alot of explaining to do,

No not at all and did not. What i am doing now plain and simple is saying you are speaking untruth of me by putting your words on me. I dont have a lot of explaining to do at all though i have because i love you and dont like what you are doing to yourself.
All i did was ask some questions as many posts here discussed “everybody gets into heaven”
Here is my post agin

Richard Dawkins, will he be in heaven?
He makes an excellent example of The Catholic Church teaching on invincible ignorance.

Will God change and remove free will?

Best we continue to love him by living in hope for him.

Bless ya

The only statement could be reworded we love our enemy’s and forgive them because they dont see what they do.

Your post has gone beyond ignorance of what i posted and leads to you placing burdon on me for no reason but you

So you are either calling Christ a liar, or you have alot of explaining to do

Being Christ like is to lift burden from others thats why i have tried to honour you by responding to you demand.

I hold nothing against you and live in hope this helps you, PS if you are not praying before you post it may help you, if you have seek council from some trusted Brothers i have glanced some of your posts to others and you may like to revisit them.

May God bless and guide you and yours, pray well and be well

I will be who I will be", you have free will so choose well who you see

 

[rinnie]

Amen

Amen

Where did that come from? are you ok or do you have some other unrelated issues you want to share? If you choose to connect Her teaching on invincible ignorance to being the teaching of The Holy spirit then the question would be rightly directed at you not me.
I see Her teaching on invincible ignorance as our trying to understand the mercy of God but made no reference in what you have quoted.

Then understand from this that when Yahooshua (pbwh) is narrated on the cross as asking God to forgive the ignorance of men is the basis of Her teaching. You have not supported YOUR suggestion that i call the teaching of the Holy Spirit invincible ignorance. All you have done is spouted understanding un supporting of your suggestion.

Amen
No not at all and did not. What i am doing now plain and simple is saying you are speaking untruth of me by putting your words on me. I dont have a lot of explaining to do at all though i have because i love you and dont like what you are doing to yourself.
All i did was ask some questions as many posts here discussed “everybody gets into heaven”
Here is my post agin

The only statement could be reworded we love our enemy’s and forgive them because they dont see what they do.

Your post has gone beyond ignorance of what i posted and leads to you placing burdon on me for no reason but you

Being Christ like is to lift burden from others thats why i have tried to honour you by responding to you demand.

I hold nothing against you and live in hope this helps you, PS if you are not praying before you post it may help you, if you have seek council from some trusted Brothers i have glanced some of your posts to others and you may like to revisit them.

May God bless and guide you and yours, pray well and be well

I will be who I will be", you have free will so choose well who you see

Oh My, Okay, Here is the way that I took what you said. Did I misunderstand your statement, Are you saying that the Church’s teaching is ignorance? If you are not saying that then I misunderstood and it is my bad.

And if I did I am ashamed of what I said, and the ignorance is indeed on me.

 

[benidict]

The Bible teaches the existence of hell. I hope not to argue with God or disagree with Him on any issue.

And this my Friend, is a very wise frame of mind to have. This is the proper fear of God that gives wisdom. May The Holy Spirit guide you into All Truth. Peace to you and yours.