But Polycarp, does the mass murderer feel secure in his belief that he is basicly a good person and God will take care of him when he dies?
My point is that don’t most people believe that they are basicly good people and although they could probably do more, they will make the grade?
Kind of like most people think they are above average drivers.
So is “doing your best” good enough or do you need guidance. I am reminded of a kid who lives in a neighborhood where stealing is a way of life. The fact that he steals less than others or that he feels remorse, good enough?
I was going to write up a nice little essay about my beliefs (for the record: moderate-to-conservative Christian), but then I realized Polycarp beat me to it. So … what he said. Very well done, Poly.
Ummm… No. That’s not accurate at all. During the Holy Jubilee one could gain a Plenary Indulgence, but you couldn’t buy one. And a plenary indulgence is not a “seat in heaven,” it is simply the alleviation of the temporal punishment due for all sins committed within your life – and it must coincide with a truly contrite confession of those sins.
And should you commit another mortal sin after recieving the indulgence, it was all for naught.
**
Again, you can’t buy indulgences, or “seats in Heaven.” That’s just not what the Church does.
Ummm… No. That’s not accurate at all. During the Holy Jubilee one could gain a Plenary Indulgence, but you couldn’t buy one. And a plenary indulgence is not a “seat in heaven,” it is simply the alleviation of the temporal punishment due for all sins committed within your life – and it must coincide with a truly contrite confession of those sins.
And should you commit another mortal sin after recieving the indulgence, it was all for naught.
**
Again, you can’t buy indulgences, or “seats in Heaven.” That’s just not what the Church does.
If we pulled out the Bible on this one, there are many things that we would learn. The most basic element is that you must belive in the Lord Jesus Christ.
So step one: Belive in Jesus.
Now step two… The next thing you will do is to find out who Jesus is or was, and what he said and did. Then you will have to figure out what that all means to you today and how beleiving in him and what he taught must change the way you live your life.
Step Two: Make life changing choices.
Now step three: Get to know him. You see, one of the major teachings of Jesus, one that sets him apart from the rest, is that Death did not hold him, because he had no sin. He was resurected from the grave, and brought back to life. He is still alive today and wants to talk with you through his Holy Spirit. So
Step Three: Get to know Jesus through the Holy Spirit.
All this could be done instantly, or it could take a life time. Ultamitly it is your choise you see. But the third step there is not talked about much in Churchian circles. Developing a personal relationship with Jesus is mentioned but not emphasized.
But think about the parables Jesus told. How many times were the “good people” told to “depart from me you workers of eniquity, I never knew you” by God? Hmmm?
The Bible has a list of things to be avoided. It’s in Malachi 3:5
…swift judgment…against the sorcerers [?]…adulterers…false swearers [liars?]…those that oppress the hireling in his wages… turn aside the stranger… and fear not me[the Lord].
Be nice to everybody, respect God, and you’re home free.
NurseCarmen, I’ve heard the same joke, but with Baptists substituted… by a Baptist. I had a Calvinist housemate, so let’s see if I can remember… five point Calvinism uses the acronym TULIP. (Bear with me, I might get some of these wrong)
Total Depravity-humans incapable of turning to God
Unconditional Acceptance- if God draws you to Him, no choice
Limited Atonement- Christ only died for the saved
Irresistable Grace- pretty self-explanitory
Perseverance of the Saints-if you’re saved, you cannot lose salvation.
From what I understand, the Catholic church does not believe in the whole “I’m saved” thing. I am under the impression that the belief is that none of us really KNOW FOR SURE if we are saved or not-that only God knows, and to assume otherwise is the “sin of presumption.”
Justin, I think the best answer is the old saw: “God doesn’t grade on the curve.” Only perfection is good enough for Him.
But, loving us and knowing that none of us can achieve perfection, He offers a way out of the problem.
However, you missed the other half of my point – I’m not doing a single thing in hopes of going to heaven; I’m doing what I do because I love God and my fellow man. Heaven, if I do get there, is simply what He will do for me because He loves me. It’s a minor sidelight to the issue, for me, of what I do and why I do it.
Not to hijack a perfectly fine thread back to the OP or anything, but where does Lewis Carroll say anything about either of them going to heaven? Alice considers whether she likes the Walrus or the Carpenter better for the reasons indicated, but neither of them is acquitted–“they were both very unpleasant characters.” Link here.
There is a certain charm to reading Alice for theological guidance, but you’re not going to get anything coherent out of it, I fear.
The truth is that no one GOES to heaven… they don’t have to go anywhere. Heaven in a sence, comes to us here.
Let me fully explain before you tear me apart.
In Genesis, God told man (Adam) to “Take dominion over the earth” God’s plan is for us to live here on earth, after all this is what he made for us.
Skip to Revelation, after all man has done to muck things up, God returns and restores his original plan. The great battle, Armegedon, vanquishes evil, that is to say, everyone who is not now nor shall be saved will be killed. With evil men gone, Jesus will at last take the throne of David and rule over the whole earth for one thousand years. You can read about it in chapter 22 I think, or close to it.
My point is, that “heaven” then occures on Earth when the evil that men do is finally dealt with.
You’re right; only some Christians say that getting into heaven is solely dependent on what you believe. Somehow, the ones who think that way make such a point of it that I tend to forget that not everyone agrees with them. And I find that particular doctrine so annoying that I tend to focus on it whenever the subject of Christianity comes up.
And I’d forgotten about predistination. To me, that one is really mystifying. God decided at the dawn of time exactly who was going to heaven and who to hell? What a depressing, discouraging concept! If everything was decided before we were even born, what’s the point of anything? If I gave any credence to any of this, I’d be really bummed out by predestination.
But about the heaven/hell thing-- Okay, some Christians say that belief in the correct things is all that matters, and some say it’s both belief and behavior. Does branch of Christianity believe that it’s entirely a matter of behavior? As in, if you lead a good life, you go to heaven, no matter what you believed? Live a good life and you’re in, be you Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Animist, Atheist, Whateverist?
Hazel, AFAIK absolutely nobody believes it’s totally on behavior, though nearly everybody at the same time says that sin separates you from God and can get you damned if not repented of.
The predestination thing, though I’m not particularly anxious to “sell” the idea, is founded in God’s foreknowledge of what someone’s life and inner motivations are going to be like – it’s not like he picks at random who’s going to Heaven and Hell, but rather that He “skips ahead to the end of the book.” That at least keeps it equitable.
Disclaimer: I am not Catholic (I’m an atheist), but was raised Catholic, and currently attend a Catholic high school. The following only applies to my interpretation of Catholic teachings.
Hell is the state of total separation from God (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1033). One can only become totally separated from God through a conscious rejection of him. However, anyone who made that choice could have not done so with full understanding: that is to say, if anyone truly understood what he was doing by rejecting God, he would not do it. Since the rejector does not have complete understanding, he is impeded in his action. Because of that impediment he cannot be sent to hell, as he clearly acted wihout full understanding of what hell is (if he understood, he would not have “rejected” God!). Therefore, true rejection of God is impossible, and therefore hell does not exist, or if it does, it is empty. Ergo, everyone goes to heaven.
The preceding also aligns with God being “all-forgiving,” and with numerous other Christian teachings, and to my knowledge, postulating that hell is empty violates no teachings. It should be noted that while there are some Catholics who hold my interpretation of their teachings, there are many others who do not. There is a lot of room for one’s own interpretation within the boundaries of what the Church allows. The preceding are certainly not my views, but rather what I see as the logical conclusions based on the Catholic premises. Your mileage may vary.
Actually, I’ve heard a number of people argue for there being a big difference between foreknowledge and predestination- one’s more or less God’s decision, the other is just God’s observation of humankind. Rom. 8:29, “Those He foreknew, He also predestined…” etc. I think the two have to be held in tension. They’re both biblical. Has anyone else read and liked The Great Divorce, by C.S. Lewis?
[QUOTE] Originally posted by VirgieLee *
**
It is the belief of (in my experience) most mainstream Christians that God’s love is not exclusive. Human beings choose by their (our) own free will to go to hell.*
I choose not to go to Hell. I also choose not to believe in a God I have no evidence for. So where does that leave you?
Ultimately, the only way for this to work is that everyone knows that Christianity is right, but consciously reject it. That is, everyone in the world except Christians are liars. I’m afraid I don’t find that a very convincing ideology. I say this as an ex-Christian.
**
Why is loving God pain? Is it more painful than Hell? If not, then why wouldn’t people choose to love God? If so, why wouldn’t you want to go to Hell?
I suppose I understand it to mean this: there are a finite number of people who are saved. God chose these people. God also chose not to save the rest of humanity (the majority). This is because if God is omnipotent and omniscient, God knows when he creates a being if they will be saved or not. (Thus, God is creating people to go to Hell as well as to Heaven.) People who are saved will naturally do good deeds. People who aren’t naturally do evil. There is, essentially, no free will.
Very pessimistic, yes. But it does beg the question as to why God continues to create human beings knowing that most of them will go to Hell (assuming, of course, if only Christians go to heaven, as Christians have always been a minority in the human race).
Now you could argue that to know in advance that people will not be saved isn’t violating free will. Fair enough. To know somebody is going to do something and not preventing it is not quite the same as doing it yourself. However, I must ask why on earth a loving God would let people go astray in this way. I don’t feel that, as a person who does not feel Jesus is my savior, I have made a conscious choice to go to Hell or to defy God. I feel that I have chosen not to defy my conscience and my ethics by believing that perfect love can include eternal damnation. If God would have answered my prayers when I was Christian to explain how this could be so – when I genuinely asked for help – perhaps I would still be a Christian. Yet my prayers were not answered, so I am not. I am left wondering: how can perfect love involve a choice between bliss and eternal torture without even giving the person choosing all of the information involved? How can you test a person by belief in God when there does not seem to be any evidence?
Personally, I can’t imagine what sort of twisted, perverse God would put people in a Hell. I mean, so they decided not to believe in you. Okay, so you toss them into a lake of fire and brimstone, where the worm dieth not and where there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth? Could you apply this to anyone and make it sound OK? Should we do this to criminals or, more accurately, disobedient children? Of course not. It’s simply a fantasy that people apply because it is satisfying to those who are ultimately not interested in love. (“He’ll get his after he dies” / “God is on my side” juvenility.) What I don’t understand is how the concept is still around and is accepted. I guess that’s because the doctrine of Hell was the single most glaring reason why I left Christianity.
Hmm. Well, I hate to say it, but it seems to violate the Bible – if you believe the Bible is perfect, then Hell ain’t empty.
Hell is often (I counted 7 times) described as a place where there “will be weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth”, as in Luke 13:27-29:
How could there be weeping and wailing of evildoers (not Satan and the fallen angels, who must be in Hell) if Hell is empty?
Of course, unless you mean that people get out of Hell eventually, in which case the Bible is silent – it’s not determined if people can escape Hell. I’d have to say, though, that even an itsy, wittle, tiny bit of Hell is too darn much.
Most Catholics do not believe the Bible is “perfect” in the sense that it is literally true. (I draw on the personal experience of attending a Catholic high school and being surrounded by about 30 monks, and never having met anyone, student or monk, who believed in the literal truth of the Bible, to make that statement.) The kind of Catholics who hold the sort of views I described in my post certainly do not.
I had a Calvinist housemate, so let’s see if I can remember… five point Calvinism uses the acronym TULIP. (Bear with me, I might get some of these wrong)