God And Hell And Free Choice

[bonkers]

[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1731149' date='Dec 18 2008, 09:35 AM']O so now your attacking Gods children who have faith and attend mass like they are called to do? I would expect that from an atheist though and a person without faith. (and again without faith there is now way you can even please God)[/quote]

LOL

[quote]The people I was refering to are people who are wicked. People who murder and rob and steal and ruin peoples lives.[/quote]

Believe it or not these folk are mostly believers. Atheists make up only something like 0.2% of the prison population.

[quote]People who are adulters and dont care because they are only concerned with pleasure. These are the peole who know they are going to hell for eternity. Wether they come out and say it doesnt matter. God writes his law into each and everyone one of us. People who are truelly evil know they are truely evil.[/quote]

But committing adultery does not make one truly evil. Evil is an abstract word we ascribe to undesirable actions. We call actions evil not people. What's that old saying, judge the sin, not the sinner?

[bonkers]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1731167' date='Dec 18 2008, 09:55 AM']Yes, no and [i]what[/i]?

Not my reasoning. Plato's. Socrates.[/quote]

Source?

[Winchester]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731176' date='Dec 18 2008, 09:02 AM']Believe it or not these folk are mostly believers. Atheists make up only something like 0.2% of the prison population.[/quote]Missed the word atheist in the description.

You're not responding to the actual arguments. Maybe you should take a break, take time to read and think before you post. You'll never win, this way.

[Winchester]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731179' date='Dec 18 2008, 09:05 AM']Source?[/quote]
The whole of their philosophies.

Read "The Cave." Not the novel by Saramago, but the essay by Plato. The Good is a basic concept in phliosophy, and you can't argue against it succesfully unless you reject the notion of Truth. If you did, then you wouldn't be arguing in the first place.

[bonkers]

[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1731169' date='Dec 18 2008, 09:56 AM']Evil people deserve hell what dont you get about that ? Those who love God are not going to be forsaked by God. You have to LOVE HIM THOUGH. I can say I love my wife but if I cheat on her I dont really love her. God will even save people who didnt believe in him if he wants to. We know the destination of no souls. But we do know evil people and those outside of the church will go to hell. Its like knowing that a glass will break if you drop it ten feet off the ground on to cement.[/quote]

You cheat on god all the time by committing mortal sins. You will forsake your love for him to indulge yourself in self gratification. It's not always your fault, it's human nature.

It's really not as simple as people are evil or they are good, really it isn't.

[Guest]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731176' date='Dec 18 2008, 10:02 AM']LOL



Believe it or not these folk are mostly believers. Atheists make up only something like 0.2% of the prison population.



But committing adultery does not make one truly evil. Evil is an abstract word we ascribe to undesirable actions. We call actions evil not people. What's that old saying, judge the sin, not the sinner?[/quote]

Ok and believers dont have a free ticket to heaven. Many will say Lord Lord on judgment day and He will send them away. An evil person is someone who does evil things and never repents. The law of God is written in them and God knows their insinde and out just like Winchester said. You cant fool God. I never said commiting adurltry makes you an evil person. Its what you do about it that decides if your evil or not. You either live a life repenting or you dont.

Edited December 18, 2008 by Guest

[Guest]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731187' date='Dec 18 2008, 10:11 AM']You cheat on god all the time by committing mortal sins. You will forsake your love for him to indulge yourself in self gratification. It's not always your fault, it's human nature.

It's really not as simple as people are evil or they are good, really it isn't.[/quote]

Yes and lucky we serve a God who lovs us and offers us confession. Christians are the worst sinners most of the time. And yes it is human nature. That is why Christ came and died so we could be forgiven. But if you dont think you need forgiven then your fooling yourself because you do. Fear of God is the start of understanding. You have to fear God before you can come to repentence and understand how much you have offenened him.

I dont think its clear cut on whos evil and good. Yet evil peole will inherit hell for eternity. Jesus Christ makes us righteous and blameless in Gods eyes. That comes through grace which accomanies faith. And again wihout faith you cannot please God.

Edited December 18, 2008 by Guest

[bonkers]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1731180' date='Dec 18 2008, 10:05 AM']Missed the word atheist in the description.[/quote]

I was making the point that not all people who believe in god are committed to the premise of goodness.

[quote]You're not responding to the actual arguments. Maybe you should take a break, take time to read and think before you post. You'll never win, this way.[/quote]

You're silly.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1727629' date='Dec 14 2008, 12:39 PM']The ontology of God is Truth and Charity itself. Therefore, although we may be sincerely wrong, the sincerity does count for something. Some - perhaps all - may be saved through Jesus (and only Jesus) even if they don't believe in Jesus as a matter of conscience or ignorance. We are accountable for that Truth and / or Charity of which we have been sincerely convicted. Man judges on the outside appearances (we can look at objective actions and discern the action to be wrong) but God judges on the heart (God looks at the subjective intentions). We cannot pull the wool over God's eyes.

God holds us accountable on an individual level, according to our capabilities and convictions. God is just. God is merciful. God is love.

"Non-Catholics" may be saved; but only if they were Catholics unknowingly. Again, mortal sin is a choice. Mortal sin is the deliberate rejection of God and thus the deliberate rejection of Truth and / or Charity. And as you implied, those who live their best according to Truth and Charity could not justly be held accountable for that of which they were ignorant.

Finally, we must hope for everyone's salvation; it is actually a sin to despair of someone's salvation.[/quote]

[quote]The people who go to Hell are the people who live in sort of Hell already; that is, people who, through no cohersive force or ignorance, engage themselves totally in a serious sin. Those who understand such sins and know them for what they are, yet freely and fully engage themselves in such acts are not happy people. Those that seem so do not likely have the full knowledge or consent towards the grave error necessary for that error to be a mortal sin.

When we say that Hell is a choice, we refer to the freedom and awareness necessary to commit a mortal sin - in other words, as mortal sin is a choice, so too is Hell. Mortal sin and Hell have virtually interchangable definitions. Why is Hell death and suffering? Because Hell is the state of being "oriented" away from God on the spiritual level. Since God is the source of life, goodness, beauty, and pleasure, to be "turned away from" him is to "separate" one's self from these divine qualities. Hell is therefore the total absence (or perhaps more accurately stated, the total opposition) of goodness, pleasure, beauty, and life.

This is why we say Hell is a place of unimaginable suffering and torture; there is little possability of removing one's self from the qualities of God totally in this life. We sometimes seem to come close. But as long as we live, no matter how much we suffer, there is always the hope of improving our quality of life. In Hell, all hope is gone.[/quote]

cf.

[quote][url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=88317&st=0&p=1726239&#entry1726239"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...p;#entry1726239[/url]

Something I have found fascinating that is hinted at in various writings in Church history - Scott Hahn seems to be a fan of the idea - is the notion that Hell and Heaven are two experiences of the same state; that of being either drawn or cast into the eternal and infinite love of God. Many scriptures refer to God in terms of consuming fire. The highest angels, closest to God, are the seraphim ("burning ones"). The thought then is that when we die, we all are faced with the glory of Almighty God; those who die in a state of aversion to that glory (i.e. mortal sin) find it terrible and want to escape, but cannot. Those who die in a state of grace but with attachments to sin find it both glorious and terrible at the same time, but only for a "time" in that their attachments are burned away by the purgation of the divine vision they longingly, if painfully, embrace. Those that die perfectly in a state of grace dive ever deeper into the "fires" of God's love.

In other words:

Hell is the experience of Divine Charity as unfathomably terrible; forever having one's back turned to it but never being able to escape.

Purgatory is the same experience as terrible, but alluring; facing it head on with joy and hope in the midst of the suffering it brings.

Heaven is the same experience as everlasting bliss and perfection.

I like this idea, as it seems to make sense that nobody - even those that choose Hell - would be able to "outrun" God's presence or "escape" God's love.[/quote]

*bump*

Bonkers,

I didn't see your reply to my last post; maybe I missed it? I have reposted and added some food for thought from another thread.

[bonkers]

Ziggamafu,

I will address your post tomorrow.

[Winchester]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731191' date='Dec 18 2008, 09:16 AM']I was making the point that not all people who believe in god are committed to the premise of goodness.[/quote]
No one said they were. You're internalizing the arguments.

[quote]You're silly. [/quote]
It's good advice.

And yes, I am silly.

[bonkers]

[quote](Ziggamafu @ Dec 14 2008, 12:39 PM)
The ontology of God is Truth and Charity itself. Therefore, although we may be sincerely wrong, the sincerity does count for something. Some - perhaps all - may be saved through Jesus (and only Jesus) even if they don't believe in Jesus as a matter of conscience or ignorance. We are accountable for that Truth and / or Charity of which we have been sincerely convicted. Man judges on the outside appearances (we can look at objective actions and discern the action to be wrong) but God judges on the heart (God looks at the subjective intentions). We cannot pull the wool over God's eyes.

God holds us accountable on an individual level, according to our capabilities and convictions. God is just. God is merciful. God is love.

"Non-Catholics" may be saved; but only if they were Catholics unknowingly. Again, mortal sin is a choice. Mortal sin is the deliberate rejection of God and thus the deliberate rejection of Truth and / or Charity. And as you implied, those who live their best according to Truth and Charity could not justly be held accountable for that of which they were ignorant.

Finally, we must hope for everyone's salvation; it is actually a sin to despair of someone's salvation.[/quote]

All may be saved? I understood universal reconcilliation to be deemed heretic by the churched? I think, if according to your line of thinking, that god judges not actions but our heart, then surely almost all people will be saved. I cant reconicle this with the church teaching there is no salvation outside the church. I know if I am wrong I am condemned to hell, but I can't accept this because I am simply following my own convictions. I'm not trying to pull the wool over gods eyes, I sincerely [b]do not[/b] believe.

[quote]The people who go to Hell are the people who live in sort of Hell already; that is, people who, through no cohersive force or ignorance, engage themselves totally in a serious sin. Those who understand such sins and know them for what they are, yet freely and fully engage themselves in such acts are not happy people. Those that seem so do not likely have the full knowledge or consent towards the grave error necessary for that error to be a mortal sin.

When we say that Hell is a choice, we refer to the freedom and awareness necessary to commit a mortal sin - in other words, as mortal sin is a choice, so too is Hell. Mortal sin and Hell have virtually interchangable definitions. Why is Hell death and suffering? Because Hell is the state of being "oriented" away from God on the spiritual level. Since God is the source of life, goodness, beauty, and pleasure, to be "turned away from" him is to "separate" one's self from these divine qualities. Hell is therefore the total absence (or perhaps more accurately stated, the total opposition) of goodness, pleasure, beauty, and life.

This is why we say Hell is a place of unimaginable suffering and torture; there is little possability of removing one's self from the qualities of God totally in this life. We sometimes seem to come close. But as long as we live, no matter how much we suffer, there is always the hope of improving our quality of life. In Hell, all hope is gone.[/quote]

Again, I can't reconcile this with traditional church teaching, that it is a place of literal fire and punishment, not just a "state of awareness" of being infinitely separate from god. I believe this is a modern, new teaching and contradicts the traditional depiction of hell and fathers like Augustine, Aquinas and the 3rd secret of fatima.

[mortify]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731976' date='Dec 19 2008, 01:36 PM']Again, I can't reconcile this with traditional church teaching, that it is a place of literal fire and punishment, not just a "state of awareness" of being infinitely separate from god. I believe this is a modern, new teaching and contradicts the traditional depiction of hell and fathers like Augustine, Aquinas and the 3rd secret of fatima.[/quote]

The issue is not so simple, and unfortunately you're not doing a good job investigating what we believe.

The Gospels also contain a statement that the damned will be tormented by a worm in hell. St Thomas Aquinas quotes St Augustine in saying that the worm is not literal, but rather a metaphor for the remorse of conscience. So clearly these men did not just blindly call everything literal.

Now St Thomas did believe that the fire in hell is of the same species as that on earth, but he acknowledged that it contains certain unearthly properties, as well as saying that it's matter is unknown. However it's important to remember that in Catholicism the opinion of a theologian does not constitute the teaching of the Church. The Church has neither condemned a metaphorical understanding, nor declared a literal understanding of the [i]fire[/i] of hell.

Secondly, it's important to understand that St Thomas make a distinction between the [i]Pain of Loss[/i] and the [i]Pains of Sense[/i]. The latter constitutes the positive punishment of hell which is described as fire. The former is the loss of the Beatific Vision, in other words, the eternal separation of the soul from God. It is this Pain which is the very essence and chief pain of hell. This is not a "modern invention" but an ancient teaching!

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1731976' date='Dec 19 2008, 01:36 PM']All may be saved? I understood universal reconcilliation to be deemed heretic by the churched? I think, if according to your line of thinking, that god judges not actions but our heart, then surely almost all people will be saved. I cant reconicle this with the church teaching there is no salvation outside the church. I know if I am wrong I am condemned to hell, but I can't accept this because I am simply following my own convictions. I'm not trying to pull the wool over gods eyes, I sincerely [b]do not[/b] believe.[/quote]

You need to broaden your understanding of "Church". "Church" means anyone within the Body of Christ, the Kingdom of God, the Catholic Church. Outside of that Body there is no salvation. How do we get into that Body? By baptism and, subsequently, maintaining a state of grace by not deliberately rejecting God. How are we baptized? Ordinarily by water. Extraordinarily by blood or desire. A person who has not been convicted of the need for baptism (like anyone incapable of coming to such a conviction) while sincerely pursuing Truth / Charity may be baptized by blood or desire (blood, by martyrdom for the sake of some good and desire, by the sincere pursuit of Truth / Charity).

As far as the theology surrounding the possibility of universal salvation, I recommend the book by the esteemed theologian (beloved by our current Holy Father) Hans Urs Von Balthasar, [i]Dare We Hope That All May Be Saved: With A Short Discourse on Hell[/i] published by Ignatius Press. The presumption of universal salvation is indeed a heresy but the hope is not. Far from it, actually. The Church has a rich theological tradition behind such a possibility. But it remains only a hopeful possibility (and moreover, Purgatory is nothing to smirk at), despite how well its probabilities may be argued. And you are of course correct in pointing out the far more prevalent expectation of a limited number of souls in Heaven.

[quote]Again, I can't reconcile this with traditional church teaching, that it is a place of literal fire and punishment, not just a "state of awareness" of being infinitely separate from god. I believe this is a modern, new teaching and contradicts the traditional depiction of hell and fathers like Augustine, Aquinas and the 3rd secret of fatima.[/quote]

That which has not been defined by dogma is still up in the air. That which has been defined is still up for re-evaluation and subsequent clarification. The nature of Hell has never been defined and speculations surrounding Hell have varied wildly. We know Hell is a real option. We know that it [i]seems [/i]that many people choose it. We know that Hell is a terrible choice, full of unfathomable suffering. We know we can hope for the salvation of all. And that is all we know. The rest is speculation and interpretation.

[bonkers]

[quote name='mortify' post='1732063' date='Dec 19 2008, 04:07 PM']The issue is not so simple, and unfortunately you're not doing a good job investigating what we believe.

The Gospels also contain a statement that the damned will be tormented by a worm in hell. St Thomas Aquinas quotes St Augustine in saying that the worm is not literal, but rather a metaphor for the remorse of conscience. So clearly these men did not just blindly call everything literal.[/quote]

No one said they did, but the belief that the hell is a literal place is prevalent throughout most of church history.

[quote]Now St Thomas did believe that the fire in hell is of the same species as that on earth, but he acknowledged that it contains certain unearthly properties, as well as saying that it's matter is unknown. However it's important to remember that in Catholicism the opinion of a theologian does not constitute the teaching of the Church. The Church has neither condemned a metaphorical understanding, nor declared a literal understanding of the [i]fire[/i] of hell.[/quote]

I believe a previous catechism referred to hell as a literal place of fire.

[quote]Secondly, it's important to understand that St Thomas make a distinction between the [i]Pain of Loss[/i] and the [i]Pains of Sense[/i]. The latter constitutes the positive punishment of hell which is described as fire. The former is the loss of the Beatific Vision, in other words, the eternal separation of the soul from God. It is this Pain which is the very essence and chief pain of hell. This is not a "modern invention" but an ancient teaching![/quote]

It's not really all that important. Out of interest, how do you know reconcile Lucia's vision of hell with this new teaching? She seemed to not just be speaking methaphorically, but of a literal place of fire and smoke. Could she have lied/mistaken?