Hell And Raphael

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Hassan' date='30 December 2009 - 02:52 AM' timestamp='1262159572' post='2027452']
Be very specific, what stearotype have I be duped into believeing?

Was it my belief that God used to deem it a fitting punishment for engaging in witchcraft that one be burned alive, or my belief that the penalty for dying in a state of mortal sin leads to eternal damnation without the possability of redemption, whose chief punishment is the unimanigable torment of being totally seperated from God and thus everything good, but which is accompanied by the accidental pains of the flesh, usually described in terms of fire and burning?[/quote]

Your belief that death is worse than sin.

As a matter of justice, every sinner is deserving of hell. We must start with that truth. A witch is a sinner and deserving of hell, the same that I am a sinner and, apart from God's mercy, deserving of hell. Now I mention God's mercy because He is gracious enough to intervene and offer forgiveness, which has been bought at the price of the blood of His only Son. I have accepted in principle God's forgiveness and try to make it mine (however feeble my attempts may often be) by living out my faith through hope and love. God has, I hope, no reason to strike me down. However, if I continue in sin, it would be both just and merciful of God to strike me down where I stand; just because I deserve it and merciful because He will not be letting me destroy myself further. Now, if I am scandalizing the people around me, then it is even more just and even more merciful, not only for me, but for them. If my entire society is corrupted (as were many of the societies of the Old Testament), then it is also just and merciful to take out all of Sodom, for instance. Yes, children die in the process, but remember: God foresees all and we can be hopeful that He has acted mercifully by removing from this life children who otherwise may have destroyed themselves through sin. We can also be hopeful in the salvation of those innocent children.

Those who believe death is worse than sin tend to obsess over this, but for those of us who do not wish to sin and would rather die, it is clearly an act of God's justice and mercy together.

[quote]You God does not only allow killing for self defense. He also permits the wholesale slaughter of women and children who happen to be raised in societies which worship the wrong diety. We don't need to get into that barbarism, but the scope of accecptable killing in you God's eyes extend considerably beyond mere self defense in response to immediate physical dange and no other options avaliable.[/quote]

Answered above.

[quote]So if you deem it necessary to kill to stop someone from endangering his or other souls with mortal din and thus eternal death of the soul, killing them can be justafied? God help us if many people every seriously believe such non-sense again.[/quote]

It is not mine to judge when it is appropriate, but the authority is given to civil leaders to make those judgments in line with the Church's principles regarding the death penalty. Given the widespread acceptance and use of the death penalty at that time (which makes good sense in context) and the risk of bringing ruin on a Christian community turned to self-destructive sin, which would also lead to the downfall of that society (keeping in mind that society was based on the Church), a witch would be posing a huge risk to society. Now, God's mercy demands that all other avenues be tried first, and so trying to convert the witch should first be attempted. Prayer should be used. I suspect in many cases exorcism was used.

[quote]Why? Firstly the Torah doesn't specify that the offender must be trying to entice others with into joining them in their sin, which collapses the main thrust of your justification. Secondly, what exactly is it about our day and age which makes it that the punishments are no longer needed? [/quote]

Sin by its nature spreads. It doesn't need to be the offenders intention to entice others into joining him/her. Secondly, the death penalty on witches would now do more harm than good, only likely to lead more people into curiosity and involvement in the occult. Furthermore, witches are not generally as harmful as they were then (most of them are tree-hugging crazy people with daddy issues), not malicious devil-worshiping folks. Although sinful, they simply aren't the downfall of society at the moment.

[quote]
This is a pretty weak defense, no offense.
[/quote]

Coming from a person who thinks God is weak, I'll take that as a compliment.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='30 December 2009 - 11:14 AM' timestamp='1262189651' post='2027516']
The fire of God's being, which is the joy of the saints, is also the very thing that causes the pain of the damned. Heaven and hell are not places, but are instead different ways of experiencing God's burning presence, for God is light to the saints and fire to the damned.

As I said in a another post: "Hell is the communion with God, who is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), experienced by the damned. So, from an Eastern Christian perspective, the damned - like the saints - will grow closer and closer to God throughout eternity. In other words, the saints and the reprobate have the same end (i.e., God), but where they differ is in how they experience that ever-moving communion with divinity (θείῳ, which is sometimes translated as 'brimstone,' i.e., the divine incense), which is the very joy of the saints and the very pain of the damned."
[/quote]
Dr. Bergsma taught this view and I loved it then as much as I love it now. It was also supported in Spe Salvi.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='30 December 2009 - 09:24 AM' timestamp='1262186660' post='2027503']
Hell is existence outside of experiencing the divine indwelling presence of God. In my reading during eschatology we were taught there there is still a sense of God's reality in hell, but a sense of the fallen. Von Balthasar in his short discourse on hell explains it best.

I don't mind you sharing about Eastern Catholicism, but I tire of the implied focus on how much superior EC is, and how often you highlight the differences instead of the fact that the Church is one body.
[/quote]

+1 (in spirit)

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='31 December 2009 - 03:14 AM' timestamp='1262189651' post='2027516']
The fire of God's being, which is the joy of the saints, is also the very thing that causes the pain of the damned. Heaven and hell are not places, but are instead different ways of experiencing God's burning presence, for God is light to the saints and fire to the damned.

As I said in a another post: "Hell is the communion with God, who is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), experienced by the damned. So, from an Eastern Christian perspective, the damned - like the saints - will grow closer and closer to God throughout eternity. In other words, the saints and the reprobate have the same end (i.e., God), but where they differ is in how they experience that ever-moving communion with divinity (θείῳ, which is sometimes translated as 'brimstone,' i.e., the divine incense), which is the very joy of the saints and the very pain of the damned."
[/quote]


Ok - now this resonates with my very being, and I surely hope that it is not contrary to Rome's teachings because it states almost exactly what I have felt about hell for a long time. The fire of love, which is so sweet to the saints, has got to cause great anguish to those who are not purified of all evil, hence the reason Purgatory hurts as well (not only not having the Beatific Vision, but feeling God's burning love while still impure).

St John of the Cross described purification of the soul (in this life) as being like the burning of a log of wood, with all of the impurities rising out first, before the log becomes consumed to the point that it is one with the fire. If one were rejecting God's mercy (in hell), then this fire of love would be an eternal torment.

Thank you Apo for explaining that view. I love it!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='nunsense' date='30 December 2009 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1262208619' post='2027584']
Ok - now this resonates with my very being, and I surely hope that it is not contrary to Rome's teachings because it states almost exactly what I have felt about hell for a long time. The fire of love, which is so sweet to the saints, has got to cause great anguish to those who are not purified of all evil, hence the reason Purgatory hurts as well (not only not having the Beatific Vision, but feeling God's burning love while still impure).

St John of the Cross described purification of the soul (in this life) as being like the burning of a log of wood, with all of the impurities rising out first, before the log becomes consumed to the point that it is one with the fire. If one were rejecting God's mercy (in hell), then this fire of love would be an eternal torment.

Thank you Apo for explaining that view. I love it!
[/quote]
I can confirm that it is not at odds with Rome. In fact, Spe Salvi applies the same thinking to purgatory in article 47.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Raphael' date='30 December 2009 - 04:34 PM' timestamp='1262208843' post='2027585']
I can confirm that it is not at odds with Rome. In fact, Spe Salvi applies the same thinking to purgatory in article 47.
[/quote]

One aspect that I remain unclear on is how this view is reconciled with the re-creation and resurrection. IOW, if the damned and the blessed both have the same end in the Lake of Fire that is God's Love, is there further theology in this direction that proposes "where they go" or how they are "segregated" when their bodies are resurrected in the context of the new Heaven and the new Earth?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='30 December 2009 - 09:38 PM' timestamp='1262227110' post='2027728']
One aspect that I remain unclear on is how this view is reconciled with the re-creation and resurrection. IOW, if the damned and the blessed both have the same end in the Lake of Fire that is God's Love, is there further theology in this direction that proposes "where they go" or how they are "segregated" when their bodies are resurrected in the context of the new Heaven and the new Earth?
[/quote]
I suspect that they would physically go where they normally would in any other valid theological view of the afterlife. God's presence will be throughout, so those in a physical hell will still be in His fiery presence, just like those in a physical paradise.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='30 December 2009 - 11:14 AM' timestamp='1262189651' post='2027516']
The fire of God's being, which is the joy of the saints, is also the very thing that causes the pain of the damned. Heaven and hell are not places, but are instead different ways of experiencing God's burning presence, for God is light to the saints and fire to the damned.

As I said in a another post: "Hell is the communion with God, who is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), experienced by the damned. So, from an Eastern Christian perspective, the damned - like the saints - will grow closer and closer to God throughout eternity. In other words, the saints and the reprobate have the same end (i.e., God), but where they differ is in how they experience that ever-moving communion with divinity (θείῳ, which is sometimes translated as 'brimstone,' i.e., the divine incense), which is the very joy of the saints and the very pain of the damned."
[/quote]
You know, without any reading of Eastern Theology, I came to this conclusion of hell myself (though influenced by the idea that Peter Kreeft left on his website). When I mentioned it--to my seminarian friends even--I nearly got called a heretic! Lawl. They insisted it was written somewhere that Heaven and hell are two distinct places. That those in heaven are not in the same place as those in hell.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='30 December 2009 - 10:57 PM' timestamp='1262231835' post='2027756']
You know, without any reading of Eastern Theology, I came to this conclusion of hell myself (though influenced by the idea that Peter Kreeft left on his website). When I mentioned it--to my seminarian friends even--I nearly got called a heretic! Lawl. They insisted it was written somewhere that Heaven and hell are two distinct places. That those in heaven are not in the same place as those in hell.
[/quote]
I've never heard such a thing, but I'd love to see where they got the idea.

[Gregorius]

I used to think of Hell as a literal death of the soul because God is absent, and as God is absent, nothing can exist.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Gregorius' date='30 December 2009 - 11:50 PM' timestamp='1262235013' post='2027768']
I used to think of Hell as a literal death of the soul because God is absent, and as God is absent, nothing can exist.
[/quote]
If God is absent, there is no hell.

[Gregorius]

Exactly, which is one of the reasons why I don't think of Hell like that anymore.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='30 December 2009 - 10:57 PM' timestamp='1262231835' post='2027756']
You know, without any reading of Eastern Theology, I came to this conclusion of hell myself (though influenced by the idea that Peter Kreeft left on his website). When I mentioned it--to my seminarian friends even--I nearly got called a heretic! Lawl. They insisted it was written somewhere that Heaven and hell are two distinct places. That those in heaven are not in the same place as those in hell.
[/quote]

Weird that you got a -1 on that post. Anyway, I suppose it could be said that Heaven and Hell will eventually be two distinct "places" if the terms are applied to post-resurrection states. Heaven and Hell are not "places", properly speaking, prior to the resurrection since spirits do not occupy space. Maybe your friends rashly assumed you were denying the resurrection or recreation? Raph, what do you think?

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Gregorius' date='30 December 2009 - 11:50 PM' timestamp='1262235013' post='2027768']
I used to think of Hell as a literal death of the soul because God is absent, and as God is absent, nothing can exist.
[/quote]

Literal death of the soul would actually be pretty nice. Unmitigated freedom with 0 consequences.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='31 December 2009 - 08:38 AM' timestamp='1262266696' post='2027807']
Weird that you got a -1 on that post. Anyway, I suppose it could be said that Heaven and Hell will eventually be two distinct "places" if the terms are applied to post-resurrection states. Heaven and Hell are not "places", properly speaking, prior to the resurrection since spirits do not occupy space. Maybe your friends rashly assumed you were denying the resurrection or recreation? Raph, what do you think?
[/quote]

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=101548&view=findpost&p=2027750"]I already gave my views.[/url]


[quote name='OraProMe' date='31 December 2009 - 10:35 AM' timestamp='1262273739' post='2027813']
Literal death of the soul would actually be pretty nice. Unmitigated freedom with 0 consequences.
[/quote]
Death of the soul is a contradiction in terms, since death is the separation of the soul from the body. The soul has no body.

Some people suggest the annihilation of the soul, but that concept wouldn't bring freedom. Even if there were no eternal consequences, there would still be consequences in this life. It goes against our nature to do evil and every sin damages our souls.