Father White is always so illuminating. Filial Fear vs. Servile Fear is a very important distinction I wasn't aware of. Very helpful. God bless you both!
Father White makes a compelling argument. I actually first heard Hell explained in terms along those lines when I was church-shopping and dabbling Protestantism (long story for another day). Anyway, I was at a Bible study and the question of who goes to Hell and who does not came up (I think it was a faith versus works argument). The Pastor said something that took me back a bit. He said there isn't a soul in Hell who doesn't choose to be there. Like the point Father White makes, he said God will never force Himself on anyone and there are souls, even unto death, who will not reconcile themselves to God's grace. He made the case that Hell isn't fire and brimstone, it is the absence of God and everything good, loving, and decent. Cruelty and evil on a level we can't get our heads around. I thought on this afterward and then the simple truth of that statement sort of struck home. I thought about people I knew, and people I know, people I love and have loved, who prefer or preferred a life of pain, a life characterized by drug abuse, sexual sin, and criminal behavior. It is hard for me to get my head around but the more I thought about the choices they made the more clearer it became in my mind anyway. The simple truth that came to the forefront was, if they chose Hell over Heaven while they are on Earth, why would they not choose Hell over Heaven when they leave it?
I recently thought/ read of something similar. Like Heaven/ purgatory and Hell is a choice of Soul after death (I know that purgatory as matter of choice is part of the Church teaching, however same can not be told about choice of Hell). I joint it with St. Faustina message of Divine Mercy and my theory is something like this. 1. God allows final repentance to every soul in moment of death. 2. The weight and magnitude of every commited sin is showed to us immidiately after our last breath. We do not understand its seriousness here on Earth but we will do after death. If you have unrepented/ unconfessed sins God will give you final chance (actually 3 chances according to St. Faustine) of repentance. But here comes the plotwist. The Soul is so ashamed of its sins that it voluntary chooses to go to Hell. It is so ashamed that it does not want God holy eyes to look at a soul. Even though that there is Jesus offering Mercy for that concrete soul. Lets say this is true. I can still appear in that position of that soul because I do not know the magnitude and seriousness of my sins and I may reject the offer of Divine Mercy when it comes. By praying for dying souls, by praying Divine Mercy chaplet, we are actually praying for them to be able to take that offered Divine Mercy from Jesus. Like someone says. The doors of the Hell are locked from inwards.
I hope I can make it to heaven, just like Matt, I too had a dream where this lady was interviewed by the news, and said " this life does not compare to what comes after". And then all of the sudden I was in a dark room with barely any light coming in, and for some reason I saw the face of Padre Pio.
@@briendoyle4680 - child abuse? Teaching morals and the truth of the universe? Funny. Those with faith have more stable marriages, more successful jobs, live more healthy and longer lives, and children do better in school on average. So, how is that abuse? Teaching love and responsibility?
My understanding has been that God doesn't send anyone to hell, everyone who is there made a conscious decision to go there by not living in the way that He expects us to. Living in sin, committing sacrilege by taking the Eucharist while not in a state of grace, making invalid confessions by intentionally not admitting them, etc. God wants us to be with Him, unfortunately we have the ability to choose otherwise.
@@gazagxrlx2974 ah I said something earlier but it didn’t send. Let me try to restate it in lighter terms. If I blow up ah building with your family in it and went to court and said oh well it’s only subjectively wrong and I didn’t do anything wrong actually I just murdered people. What would happen to me?
@@gazagxrlx2974 how is that an appeal to emotions I asked if I murdered your family and we went to court and I told them good and evil don’t exist would I be put in prison for life or not?
The error in the judgement of “unfairness” (apart from not understanding the processes of purgation/purification of the saved that - albeit in state of grace - are not perfected or yet purified to enter to the Heavenly Jerusalem) is to advocate for “eternity” and “eternal” meaning an “infinite amount of time”. The erroneous affirmation, in this sense, is of categories: eternity means not ‘during an infinite period of time’ but something that happens OUTSIDE of the very limitation of time. The eternal damned in hell will suffer punishment but NOT in the temporally-limited dimension. When we say the Son is begotten from the Father in eternity, it does not mean it took “forever” in this operation; rather it means that the eternal generation is definitely outside of the conditioned time. The very concept of eternal punishment more than often is used wrongly by us because we grasp to understand eternity - due to our intellectual limitations - as if it meant an infinite sum of fractions of time, which is typical of our reasoning processes. Those questioning the proportionality of eternal damnation in general feel it has to do with the “measure of time” so as in the temporal dimension, but only with an infinite amount, as if it were referential to the “oikonomia” (the history of created things, meaning the very history of salvation, which is fully submitted to time and space) and not something that is post-economical. So some think that as even the greatest of mortal sinner can sin only during a limited time, therefore they are tempted to defend a version of universalism (‘apokatastasis’) according to which hell is only limited in time and all will be saved eventually. ‘Apokatastasis’ is one of the errors committed by the great Origen, very early theologian from the School of Alexandria, the “allegorical school”. It is very obscure to say it was officially condemned by the Popes or early Ecumenical Council, and I particularly think it was not. Even for Eastern Orthodoxy it is clearly minoritary to defend that ‘Apokatastatis’ is a proposition theologically acceptable. The well-know “Fifteen Canons Against Origenism” most probably existed as a document that endorse the magisterial teachings of the Bishos - although very polemical - and they condemned as heresy the theory of “universalism” (according to which all will be saved eventually), but the core polemics is that it most probably was NOT inserted in the obscure condemnations addressed to Origenism during the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (5th Ecumenical Council, 553AD), if only maybe in minor regional councils. Therefore, many speculative EO theologians try to defend that the hypothesis is not heterodox, using not only Origen, but specially the teachings of St Gregory of Nissa. But they seemed to be called as a “theolegoumenon”(theological speculation) that is outside of Sacred Tradition if Tradition is seen as a whole, and one that is not defensible if the Sacred Scriptures are interpreted to all of the consequences. So it seems a little confusing (as many cases can doctrinally be, to be sincere, among EO differentiation between teachings and theological speculation). According to my understandings, on the other hand (take me not as any authority, please), universalism (‘Apokatastasis’) was for sure collaterally condemned by the Council of Trent in the decrees of justification and the way they correlate eternal damnation with free will and grace. So it is NOT possible to defend ‘Apokatastasis’ for a Catholic any longer, even though we may speculate how it can inform the theological virtue of hope - but we can’t simply deny i) the reality of hell and ii) the eternity of damnation, under the correct concept for it.
The way some would describe it, my mother is in Hell, and while I think of myself as a good and obedient Catholic, that is one thought I cannot abide. I pray for her ALL the time and hope in God.
@Oskar The error in the judgement of “unfairness” (apart from not understanding the processes of purgation/purification of the saved that - albeit in state of grace - are not perfected or yet purified to enter to the Heavenly Jerusalem) is to advocate for “eternity” and “eternal” meaning an “infinite amount of time”. The erroneous affirmation, in this sense, is of categories: eternity means not ‘during an infinite period of time’ but something that happens OUTSIDE of the very limitation of time. The eternal damned in hell will suffer punishment but NOT in the temporally-limited dimension. When we say the Son is begotten from the Father in eternity, it does not mean it took “forever” in this operation; rather it means that the eternal generation is definitely outside of the conditioned time. The very concept of eternal punishment more than often is used wrongly by us because we grasp to understand eternity - due to our intellectual limitations - as if it meant an infinite sum of fractions of time, which is typical of our reasoning processes. Those questioning the proportionality of eternal damnation in general feel it has to do with the “measure of time” so as in the temporal dimension, but only with an infinite amount, as if it were referential to the “oikonomia” (the history of created things, meaning the very history of salvation, which is fully submitted to time and space) and not something that is post-economical. So some think that as even the greatest of mortal sinner can sin only during a limited time, therefore they are tempted to defend a version of universalism (‘apokatastasis’) according to which hell is only limited in time and all will be saved eventually. ‘Apokatastasis’ is one of the errors committed by the great Origen, very early theologian from the School of Alexandria, the “allegorical school”. It is very obscure to say it was officially condemned by the Popes or early Ecumenical Council, and I particularly think it was not. Even for Eastern Orthodoxy it is clearly minoritary to defend that ‘Apokatastatis’ is a proposition theologically acceptable. The well-know “Fifteen Canons Against Origenism” most probably existed as a document that endorse the magisterial teachings of the Bishos - although very polemical - and they condemned as heresy the theory of “universalism” (according to which all will be saved eventually), but the core polemics is that it most probably was NOT inserted in the obscure condemnations addressed to Origenism during the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (5th Ecumenical Council, 553AD), if only maybe in minor regional councils. Therefore, many speculative EO theologians try to defend that the hypothesis is not heterodox, using not only Origen, but specially the teachings of St Gregory of Nissa. But they seemed to be called as a “theolegoumenon”(theological speculation) that is outside of Sacred Tradition if Tradition is seen as a whole, and one that is not defensible if the Sacred Scriptures are interpreted to all of the consequences. So it seems a little confusing (as many cases can doctrinally be, to be sincere, among EO differentiation between teachings and theological speculation). According to my understandings, on the other hand (take me not as any authority, please), universalism (‘Apokatastasis’) was for sure collaterally condemned by the Council of Trent in the decrees of justification and the way they correlate eternal damnation with free will and grace. So it is NOT possible to defend ‘Apokatastasis’ for a Catholic any longer, even though we may speculate how it can inform the theological virtue of hope - but we can’t simply deny i) the reality of hell and ii) the eternity of damnation, under the correct concept for it.
@Oskar No problem, my friend, it is because you are preaching ‘Apokatastatis’ in almost every post. I will come later to a fuller response to you, specially on the morality aspects. English is not my first language, so I am not a prolific writer in English. Therefore I will take some time. And I will show the wrongness and the absolute risk of your position, how it can (and does) lead to moral relativism and indifferentism and so forth. The many deficiencies on eschatology is responsible for the spiritual state of affairs in the present days and I will come later to them to show how disturbing, practically incorrect and morally unacceptable the theory is. Please do not reduce my argument as if whatever I say to you is that I am dichotomizing “dogma” x “Christ’s love”, which is simply a strawman so outside of the range of the discussion (but I can come with some things written about how wrong those conceptions of God’s love can be). Respectfully.
I'm sorry to say this, but you know that God is just and cannot allow a soul who died in mortal sin to avoid just punishment. She is probably in Hell. I'm really sorry it turned out like this.
For anybody who says that people can't choose hell for themselves - have you ever met a drug addict or been addicted to drugs yourself? I think if we look around us we see that people choose hell for themselves all the time. I know that God is infinitely just. So I guess I find solace in the fact that even if I'm in hell, I'll know exactly what I did to end up there. I won't feel like I was put there unjustly. I hope that nobody ends up there but I think we need to be careful not to let wishful thinking lead us to be more willing to sin. "Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom". God bless all you. I hope you find salvation.
Do you understand what addiction is and means? Many serious drug addicts don't want to keep using drugs, but they are compelled to by their body's chemistry. Just like no one would actually choose to be tortured for all eternity, no drug addict wants to remain in their current state, they're just trapped. Let me ask you then, if you do wind up in hell, what did you do to end up there?
@@tomandrews1429 I won't pretend to know. I don't have the divine knowledge that God does. All I know is that my life has been a series of selfish behavior and turning away from love, and I pray for God's help every day to turn away from that sin. Without God's grace I would continue to sin forever.
@@tylerjarjoura3270 Well then I'm confused. First you say you'll know exactly what put you there, now you say you don't know. If hell is real, shouldn't God make the rules for who goes there crystal clear for us while we're on earth?
Very well put Father Thomas, the difference between excited occasion and forethought when it comes to mortal sin, thank you. As it describes a range of sin and the activities leading to sin, is information that would have been useful to my goddaughter before she passed away 🕇
@@iraborpeter thank you for your comments, .., evil women and evil spirits are entities that I have been dealing with since 1995 (January). At that time God took me out of my body and took me home and into Himself, .., for a chat, .., our Mother has been my companion with our Lord ever since, and that is; I am now aware of their continued presence. My Goddaughter is safely home and did convert from exercising witchcraft to being Ukrainian Catholic (having been a catechumen for three years), what a joy and I can still taste that. There will be evil doers in the future on my pathway, hopefully God calls them to conversion and if He chooses me to help with catechism for those people then that will be so joyfully accepted by me and our Mother of whom Jesus said that I must pilgrimage with. I am an injured worker living in Alberta having to deal with wcb and its compensation which brings me to a sad point of having to say that I am sorry but I do not have enough money to provide charity to others much less feel so bad about not being able to contribute to the collection plate at my diocese, qnd with my Bishops permission I can attend Mass and contribute if and when I can. I am sorry that I cannot give to your recommended charity and continue to provide assistance to Injured workers free of charge. I was taught wcb material and will give freely the help all of us injured employees need 🕇God help us all and Blessings to you and I will keep the child and family as well you in my prayers🕇
My question is about proportionality. My sense is that even the worst sinners, for example, the mass murderers and dictators, serial rapists etc, can only ever commit a finite number of mortal sins before they die. So if the sinfulness of even the worst sinners is limited in this sense, how can the punishment be forever, that is, unlimited in time?
Chris, it is not a Medieval invention. Be careful. Those who say it to you represent a risk to your soul at the very least. The very concept of eternal punishment more than often is used wrongly by us, because we grasp to understand eternity - due to out intellectual limitations - as if it meant an infinite sum of fractions of time. Those questioning the proportionality of eternal damnation in general feel it has to do with the measure of time so as in the temporal dimension, in the “oikonomia” (in the history of created things, the very history of salvation, submitted to time and space): as even the greatest of mortal sinner can sin only in a limited time, therefore many are tempted to defend some sort of version of universalism (‘apokatastasis’). The error is to advocate for “eternity” and “eternal” meaning an infinite amount of time. The error is categorical: eternity means not during an infinite period of time, but something that happens outside of the limitation of time. That’s only this. The eternal damned in hell will suffer punishment outside of the temporally-limited dimension. When we say the Son is begotten from the Father in the eternity, it does not mean it takes “forever” in the operation, but that the “eternal” generation is outside of the conditioned time. ‘Apokatastasis’ is one of the errors committed by the great Origen, very early theologian from the School of Alexandria or the “allegorical school”. It is very obscure to say it was officially condemned by the popes or early Ecumenical Council, and I particularly think it was not, but it was collaterally condemned by the Council of Trent in the decrees of justification and the way it correlates the eternal damnation with free will. So it is NOT possible to defend ‘Apokatastasis’ for a Catholic. Even for Eastern Orthodoxy it is clearly very minoritary to defend ‘Apokatastatis’ is a proposition theologically acceptable. The well-know “Fifteen Canons Agains Origenism” existed - albeit very polemical - and condemned as heresy the theory of “universalism” (according to which all will be saved eventually), but the polemics is that it most probably was NOT inserted in the obscure condemnations addressed during the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (5th Ecumenical Council), during 553AD. Therefore, many speculative EO theologians try to defend this hypothesis as not heterodox, using not only Origen, but specially the teachings of St Gregory of Nissa. But they seemed to be called as a “theolegoumenon”(theological speculation) outside of Sacred Tradition and not possible if the Sacred Scriptures are interpreted to all its consequences. So it seems a little confusing (as many cases can doctrinally be, to be sincere, in EO).
@Oskar I will come later to a fuller response to you, specially on the morality aspect of the discussion. English is not my first language, so I am not a prolific writer in English. Therefore I will take some time. And I will show the wrongness and the absolute risk of your position, how it can (and does) lead to moral relativism and indifferentism and so forth. The many deficiencies on eschatology is responsible for the spiritual state of affairs in the present days and I will come later to them to show how disturbing, practically incorrect and morally unacceptable the theory is. Please do not reduce my argument as if whatever I say to you is that I am dichotomizing “dogma” x “Christ’s love”, which is simply a strawman so outside of the range of the discussion (but I can come with some things written about how wrong those conceptions of God’s love can be). Respectfully.
Because God is infinite, an offense against Him is infinite. If an offense is infinite, only two things can happen. Infinite punishment, or infinite atonement. Christ (who is infinite) died to offer the infinite atonement.
@@masterchief8179 Thank you for this contribution Master Chief. Please explain a bit more about the end of time and the nature of the situation that is, as it were, beyond time. It seems that time began with the creation, and there are many references to the end of time. Is the state of things after the end of time something like an eternal present? Are there any helpful metaphors in scripture or any plausible philosophical accounts of this state?
POPE JOHN PAUL II: Can God, who loves man so much, permit the man who rejects him to be condemned to eternal torment? The silence of the church is, therefore, the only appropriate position for Christian faith. Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, “It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Mt. 26:24) his words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation.
@@tomasparra720 There is a simple answer. Religion is false, and the God they believe in does not exist. Not saying there is no God. But the specific God they believe in, is made up
@Harry Waddington so someone who choose to have different believes and different opinions and have every right to not support someone in their free will deserve to burn in hell and be tortured forever?
@Harry Waddington so by your logic if someone does not like bts or support them it's a fair punishment to send them to a place where they get Tortured and in pain forever?
The torturous fires of hell, the cleansing fires of purgatory, are they the same fires? The Seraphim (the fiery ones) are the nearest angels to GOD because they are said to burn with the greatest love for Him. Could it all be the same fire? Could the effects of these fires on our immortal souls be dependent on our love for GOD?
As St. Padre Pio has said, the souls that go to hell are not because God wants them to go there but because these souls are the those that refuse to ask for God's forgiveness, those souls that refuse to ask for God's mercy.
@Contro Corrente I'm not a great scholar or theologian but I can answer you as one brought up in my Catholic faith: The purpose of our souls is to love our Creator. ❤ That love is meant to be shared with others and in His creation that is why He gave us life on earth. But God also loves us sooo much that He gave us free will. Even the free will to "not love Him back." 💔 And how we live our lives on earth is a reflection of that choice. But God never stops loving and pursuing the sinner, even at the hour of their death. God never abandons us whether it is in times of joy or suffering. It is we who abandon Him always. 💔 God be with you my friend. ❤ 🙏
@Oskar My friend, I will do my best to answer this based on my faith. God disciplines His children daily. He works through the people in our lives and in our life experiences. He tests our faith in Him by allowing pain and suffering. He rejoices with us when we experience joy. He protects us from our bad choices by redirecting us to something better. From the moment we wake up until the end of the day, we have the choice to do all that pleases Him. To do only what is good despite our imperfections. To exercise virtues daily. To keep trying our best to return to Him when we fall again into sin - when we feel lost and afraid. But by giving us free will, God knows that there will be those people "who will willingly choose evil." Take note that sin is a fruit of evil but not necessarily evil itself (as what Catholicism teaches). God loves sinners but He despises evil. God always pursues sinners and wants to win them over. Sinners repent and a lot of them can change for the better. But one who willingly chooses evil, dies in a state of evil. But what I also love about Catholicism is that we recognize and accept that Hell is real but we don't try to focus on that. Growing up Catholic, I was always taught by my parents and our mother Church that the reason we follow and love God is because we were made for Him and our hearts were made to love Him. It is not the idea that: "we do all that is good and pleasing to the Lord just to avoid Hell." If we focus on "avoiding Hell", then we are wasting our time. Our focus should be living a life of holiness to please God because we love Him. But most people on earth do not live good lives - most live selfish lives and are too attached to earthly things. That is why the concept of Hell is unfair. That is why the concept of eternal punishment seems unfair. Don't worry my friend. ❤ Why focus on Hell when the mercy of our Lord is infinite and His love is abundant? Let us ask for His love and mercy always. ❤ In Catholicism, we call it the Divine Mercy. ❤ Like as St. Padre Pio said (one of my favorite saints), the souls who are in Hell are those that refuse to ask for God's mercy.
@Oskar When I was younger, I had to attend Catechism, theology and philosophy classes at my Catholic school. And I was overwhelmed by the different theologies from the early Church fathers up until the modern Catholic Church. We had a lot of debates in class. And I remember being just like you, who wanted an explanation to everything because even the great Catholic Doctors of the Church contradicted each other. And there was a point when I got so confused on what to believe, I had a mental breakdown and had to talk to our school chaplain (and he eventually became my spiritual director ❤). I can never forget what he told me. And he handed me a prayer card with a quote by St. Thomas Aquinas - until now, that quote is one of my favorites to whisper to myself, especially when times are very confusing and overwhelming. I am not a member of any religious order, not a priest/nun or a theologian or great scholar. I am just a simple person who wants to do her best in being a good Catholic daughter especially during these difficult times when I have to be a pillar of strength to my family. 💔 Maybe someone like you will shine in the field of philosophy or theology. ❤ I think you should pursue it, if you are considering that in the future. 😊 But for a simple person like me, this quote from a dear saint has made much more sense than everything I had learned about Catholicism in school: "To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible." - Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church
my question is: if you are not in a state of grace and you know that, so you ask God for forgiveness in an imperfect way and want to go to confession as soon as possible and then you die... it would seem unjust for you to go to hell, but because you didn’t have perfect contrition and didn’t confess then i think you will be going to hell. am I wrong? do i have a false understanding? it just seems unjust
There is your disposition to go as soon as possible to the sacrament. God see the disposition of your heart. So there is a desire of reconciliation with God. That is the essence of a perfect contrition.
Imperfect contrition is when you are sorry because you don't want to go to hell, and you don't give up attachment to sins. Think, "I don't want to go to hell, so I will confess, but I'm not going to do much to change my life because I still enjoy certain things". Perfect contrition is when you are sorry because you offended God, and you want to give up your sins ( *all* of them). Confession is necessary for both to be forgiven, but you can see why just being "sorry" isn't enough in the first case. You are sorry, but you aren't sorry for love, you are sorry for selfish reasons. While you may not intend to do that specific sin again, you may enjoy gossiping too much to give it up. That shows your focus is still too inward. In this case yeah, you'd still go to hell. However, we do not know the state of others souls, and we rarely even know the true state of our soul, so if you sin, just do your best to give it all up. As long as you actively move towards God, even if you commit a mortal sin, and you sincerely push for it, and sincerely attempt to remove occasions of sin and attachment of sins in your life, you'll be on the right road. The idea is to give up sin and look forwards to God. If you spend your time in prayer and movement towards the goal, you'll be better off. Leave the rest in God's hands.
@@AConsumer999 Confession is ok for imperfect, but perfect is required if you cannot get to confession. As for the "I forgot to confess such and such!" is usually covered during confession when you end and say, "For these sins and any I have forgotten, I am sorry." If you don't say that I recommend it. I didn't think about it until I read something either from St. Francis, the TLM missal, or the 1890's "The Catechism Explained" (that's right, the 1890's, not the 1990's).
@@Arkangilos "You aren't sorry for love, you are sorry for selfish reasons." I'd argue that any for of contrition is inherently selfish. Catholics don't love God because they know Him. They love God because they were taught they MUST love Him or else. Similar to how Chinese citizens are taught to love their country before anything else. Why do you love God? You're taught that if you love Him and live his commandments that you will be rewarded (selfish). And you are also taught if you don't love Him, you go to hell and are tortured forever and ever. So people want to save their own skin which is also selfish. Even if we look past the indoctrination that you HAVE to love Him for salvation, let's just say that you are taught He made all things and He loves you more than anyone else loves you. You might develop personal feelings that you want to please Him, but this is just a transactional relationship which can also be viewed as selfish.
@@rambo3rd471 I don't love Him because I want to go to heaven. I don't even presume to think I'll get there, and I certainly don't deserve to be. I love Him because He gave me life, gave me a family, gave me legs, arms, eyes, friends, etc. Because He has helped me. I don't know anyone who loves God because He'll send them to hell if they don't. The only people I know that use hell as you did are atheists. Every single Christian I know, from Catholic to Calvanists, love God because we want to. I personally don't try to follow His commandments because I'll go to hell if I don't, I try to follow His commandments because they are good in themselves, and I have *never* met a single miserable person who has followed His commandments. I myself was far more miserable when I slept around and acted contrary to His commands. Do not presume to judge why people love God.
"And Hades gave up its dead and those whose names were not written in the book of life were cast into the Lake of Fire". That's pretty clear cut. You can't send yourself to Hell. God puts you there. "The Gates of Hell are locked from the inside" is a rationalization from CS Lewis who bordered on Universalism.
How on earth can anyone know whether God is infinitely just or wise or good. The fact is, no one knows anything of the kind, but a great many people want it to be so. I wouldn't want to rely on the goodness or justice of someone who consigns anyone to eternal punishment.
It strikes me as fitting. Consider the fact that we're able to love at all. If God created us why would it not be fitting that He be the Source of love?
@@frjohn413 And of course, if one is a Christian, one has to find a way of extrapolating that God is the source of all good but in no way the source of any evil. That truly is a difficult feat to accomplish! Philosophers and theologians have attempted such but accomplished only the most mediocre solutions, at best. Ordinary folks look the conundrum in the eye and think - BS, hogwash, makes no sense! (On account of ordinary folks being more in communion with real life, real problems that is). I'd say that someone who genuinely believes that anyone, almost no matter what their crime, deserves eternal punishment for said crime/s, must him/herself be in urgent need of psychiatric diagnosis. Finite crimes and eternal punishments? Just contemplate the implications of such. A "god" who mandated eternal punishments would inevitably be more evil and immoral than any human could conceivably ever be.
@@laurameszaros9547 Because evil is parasitic on the good. Evil is the absence of Good. Lucifer rebelled against God, as did Adam and Eve. Evil is a deprivation of goodness, goodness in that case taking the form of obedience. God was therefore indirectly (or accidentally, as Aquinas says) the cause of evil.
Sure he does.That's why he created eternal torture. But let's not lay an ounce of blame on the 'creator' of the worst place imaginable. Instead, let's lay the "bad choice" blame on humans who lack belief in a book full of contradictions and horrific moral values. Sounds absolutely fair to me.
The whole argument that "God sends no one to hell, they choose to go" has always struck me as inadequate. St. Paul says we "see through a glass darkly," so can any decision we make really be given with "full knowledge and consent?" We are flawed and finite beings. Seeing clearly is a lifelong process. We say God is just, but a god that would allow someone to go into eternal torment based on finite sins committed with imperfect human frailty and knowledge hardly seems just to me. Another problem I have with the Christian Hell doctrine is that the words we translate as "hell" in the Bible don't refer to the our modern concept of a fiery place of torment. There are only 3 words used: Sheol (which was equivalent to the bleak afterlife of Hades), Gehenna (a physical location outside Jerusalem that had a nasty history of idolatry and child sacrifice) , and one instance of "tartarus," used only once by Saint Peter in one of his letters. It's hard to translate, but most scholars interpret it as "Pit." None of those words imply the hell of Christianity, which developed more out of poetic works like Dante and was influenced by Greek ideas of the afterlife. My point here is that I think Father meant well, and he's doing his best to help Matt tease out this difficult question. But his explanations for why God would "allow" someone to go to Hell are what I've heard a thousand times, and all it does is generate fear and anxiety towards a God we're all told is supposed to be good. We need to stop motivating people to do good through fear. The doctrine of hell is problematic and cultivates an immature faith based on punishment rather than love.
I'm not an universalist by any means, but authors like DBH pose some good challenges to the traditional infernalist view. It's worth checking those up.
Certainly many of the Church fathers - not merely Gregory of Nyssa and Origen - held universalist views. I dare not defy my God and say all men will certainly be saved, for He certainly warned us about these fires. I believe for good reason. But reason such as I have it does tell me a finite creature will be damned eternally for finite reason and apparently finite will and emotion. And I am unsure of this.
@@HolyKhaaaaan I would just recall what Christ said when He was asked if many would be saved: Matthew 7:14. “Narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and few there be who find it.” Mathew 22:14 “Many are called, but few are chosen” Luke 13 13:23 And a certain man said to him: Lord, are they few that are saved? But he said to them: 13:24 Strive to enter by the narrow gate: for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter and shall not be able.
@@HolyKhaaaaan Origen is not a Church Father. You must have a Catholic and orthodox faith to be called a Father, not just by existing in the patristic period.
@Oskar It’s clear you haven’t read scripture, considering Christ and all His apostles say many will go to hell for all eternity, and few will go to heaven.
God does not "send" anyone to hell......people choose hell. And God loves them enough not to force them into His presence forever "against" their will.
@Oskar You need to get the "Dante's inferno" conception of "HELL" out of your mind. What makes you think "hell" is such a bad place?? Hell is simply a "state of being" where "God" is completely removed. Isn't that what you want?? God has ZERO to do with hell. There, you are finally FREE!!!. No more God.....no more rules......no more commandments.....no more judgements......no more SIN. SIN is a behavior that is "repugnant" to God. But God has nothing to do with hell....so He will no longer be offended. .....I just don't understand.....isn't that what you "atheists'" want??? No God.....all freedom??
@Oskar YOU SAID, "where God is completely removed, that's impossible. " 100% your opinion. where's your proof of that?? Where's your proof it's impossible? YOU SAID, "God is everywhere present and fills all things. There is no existence without the presence of God, ever." ...again just your opinion. So you're saying that God is incapable of creating a state void of His presence?? God's not "powerful" enough to create Hell??? ......AGAIN, that's just YOUR opinion.....and YOUR opinion has ZERO authority. YOU SAID, "God does not "get offended", he is not some psychological entity, like Zeus or Odin. God is not arbitrary." ....again, just your opinion. 100% OPINION YOU SAID, "Free will in Christianity does NOT mean the ability to arbitrarily choose between God or Not-God, it means having your will freed from ignorance and the bondage of sin so that your will can naturally "choose" God." ......AGAIN....just your OPINION. that's just YOUR personal philosophy of Christianity!! It means ABSOLUTELY nothing!!! YOUR claims have ZERO authority!!! If you think they do.....please tell me where your authority comes from??
@Oskar Yeah....start naming some of these "theologians"? YOU SAID, "Where does my authority come from? How about every competent Theologian ever? " Oaky....name them.....name a Theologian that thinks God is not powerful enough to create a state of being void of Himself?? YOU SAID, "This is the way that Christianity has always conceived of God. God is not some powerful being out there making decisions as he pleases, he is Being-itself. " JUST YOUR OPINION!! I don't know of any theologian that thinks God does not or cannot "make decisions"......that makes no sense. YOU SAID, "Any Catholic priest will tell you the same thing since it's Catholic dogma".... ......God is Being itself.....yes that is true.....but you're acting as if God is mute or somehow not involved, or incapable of making decisions with His creations. I don't know ANY priest that thinks that. Again, all these thing you think ARE JUST YOUR OPINIONS!!! where's your support for any of these ideas??? Let's cut through the nonsense.......let me ask a question (that I almost guarantee you won't answer directly).....what church do you go to??? You're clearly a protestant of some ilk....so do tell.....what denomination are you??
@Oskar Right.....it's all nonsense.....it's just YOUR opinions. Augustine and Aquinas NEVER taught that God was somehow "unable" to remove His presence from Hell. God can do ANYTHING He chooses to do. God is in NO WAY bound to the limitations of human reason and logic......that's hilarious!! I don't blame you for keeping your church hidden (just like I predicted you would).......if I went to your church, I would keep it a secret too. YOU SAID, "The problem with Christianity for the most part is this simple minded fanaticism and dogma worship." Just YOUR OPINION....means nothing.....has ZERO authority. YOU SAID, " It's always sad when someone makes an Idol out of the Church instead of following Christ." ......just more opinion without authority....means ZERO. And YOU follow Christ, right?? In a church you're to cowardly to name....LOL...okay, sounds right....typical protestant mumbo jumbo lol
This was a great full video, but this answer was (inevitably, I think) the weakest moment. Keep asking this question, Matt, because I sense your God-given intuition and reason continue to find Fr.'s answer less than solid.
Matt, my dear brother in Christ-this is where my Protestant (or Reformed Catholic!) heart *breaks* over your anxiety. Yes, it does seem bloody unfair in the case of a college student who masturbates and goes to hell in your scenario. Why? Because it is utterly *unfitting*. In that situation, it’s a college student who tries to resist, tries to not fall, but does and then dies. But Matt, this is where our respective theologies make a colossal difference. As a Roman Catholic, you have to say that this guy committed a mortal sin and, potentially, fell out of grace and is going to hell. As an Anglican, with other Protestants, I can say “no. If this student had an overarching disposition of repentance-he resisted, he fell, but he repents and strives to fight sin (or would have had he not died)-then God-given faith is alive in this man. This is incredibly huge. For us, by faith alone you’re united to Christ-and Christ, by faith, will never leave us or forsake us. He dwells in us, and the reality of constant repentance is evidence that he is in us (which is why Luther called the whole Christian life a life of repentance). You *can* have assurance. Obviously, unrepentant sin ought to darken someone’s assurance-faith without works is a dead faith. But by faith, you are united to Christ and made a new creation; and the life of obedience necessary to salvation is a life already contained within the principle of repentant faith.
I think it seems unfair or unfitting because such a person *does* have the life of God in Christ in them. If they are repentant, striving for holiness, and gradually growing in holiness (however slowly), then the Spirit is at work. Matt, you don’t have to give up everything you love about Catholicism to get the best of both Catholicism and Protestantism. Have you ever considered Anglicanism? We think we have all of the above: continuity in apostolic succession, the insights of the Reformation, the general ecclesial structure of the Catholic Church (minus the primacy of the bishop of Rome), etcetera. And we have a rich sacramental life. There are treasures of assurance for you in Reformed Catholicism brother!
@@anglicanaesthetics Nah I love being Catholic with the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ ✝️ in the Holy Eucharist and with the Blessed Virgin Mary.
If you reject God's son Jesus Christ you will go to hell. Because He died and shed his blood in our place, he took all of our sins upon himself as a sacrifice and if you reject him there is no other place for your soul to go but to hell for eternity because the soul lives forever. This is keeping it simple while others complicate it with many words.
What l can't understand is it took God billions of years to create the earth and the cosmos and it is not done yet but we have to perfect ourselves in the space of one lifetime and if we can't accomplish that we spend eternity in hell !!! So hard to be a good Catholic l feel as if l have the sword of Damocles over my head.
My belief is that your sins are forgiven if you believe that Jesus dies on the cross for you. If you truly believe that, then you should want to work towards becoming a better Christian and following the teachings in the Bible. None of us will ever be perfect, we're all sinners like the Bible states. I feel it's easy to get overwhelmed, trying to be "perfect" which we'll never obtain. Just accept that you're a sinner, and try to do better. Like Fr. Thomas Joseph Points out that when our time is up, God knows what's in our hearts.
Maybe God gives us all the opportunity to choose him regardless of what sins we died with. Do we truly desire Him and Him alone? I have a hard time believing God sends one to hell who truly loves Him. Focus more on your heart's desire for heaven and less on whether you've "earned" eternal union with the Father.
@@Arkangilos Absolutely. If one died without confessing, like the example Matt mentioned in the video, does that sin dictate thier fate? I would think it's possible that thier relationship with God has more weight than a single weak moment.
@@michaelisbell1848 Well, like the Dominican said, we do not know how culpable he was to it. We can only pray for his soul. It's one thing to assume he will be ok or he will be in hell. It's another to say, "This is a mortal sin, if you commit a mortal sin you are cut off from God. Work not to sin." The first is a judgment, the second is a warning, or a teaching. I can give warnings and teachings about the fate of those who sin mortally without judging their soul.
@@jen9774 It stands for "Order of Preachers" - otherwise known as the Dominican order. Members of that order have "OP" after they're name to denote their affiliation. They're typically smart haha.
Do you not believe that Jesus suffered and died on the cross for ALL of our sins, past, present and future? Should we repent, yes, of course. If the individual in question has accepted Jesus Christ as His Lord and Savior He is saved for all eternity and will spend eternity in the presence of The Lord. Your last breathe on earth is your first breathe in Heaven. We should never presume to know God’s actions between the first and last breathe! He is GOD, He does the impossible if He chooses too. We all sin and fall short daily, we should never stand in judgment of others regarding their Salvation. That decision is Gods, His alone!
For me Hell has never bothered me, might be because of my Confucianism. Hell describes perfectly the end state of a man who have failed to fulfill his nature endowed by and the will of Heaven (God). If anyone, or me, end up in Hell then I know it is because one deserves it. God's love is also his justice. "How vast is God, the ruler of men below! How arrayed in terrors is God, with many things irregular in his ordinations! Heaven gave birth to the multitudes of the people, but the nature it confers is not to be depended on. All are [good] at first, but few prove themselves to be so at the last." -Book of Odes My main dislike of heaven and hell (In all religions) is that it teaches people to be insincere, they preach to follow a religion simply because of profit/advantages, as opposed to getting to actualize ones potential in this world and through it know the Will of God.
Great video and Matt doesn't hold back on his vocabulary love it, but at the same time I find it very frustrating. Do we need the idea of eternal punishment for masterbation?
Who is going to be here for 200 years . Keep stealing from the poor and the lovers of them self and money . What do you expect god this people heat you so much
I think the question of eternal torment points to the great failure of religiosity, it almost begs you to excuse the inexcusable and forces you to diminish the inherent empathy that humans have for one and other in favour of a foreign morality that is not native to us. Believers do this consciously in order to maintain their faith position because for them the alternative would be too much to bear. Atheists on the other hand do not suffer from this anomaly.
Well said, tho I wouldn't call it a great failure of religiosity, since Confucians and Daoists would agree with your statement. Your critique for instant is also found in Mengzi as well as other Confucian philosophers in regard to morality that does not conform with human reality. Many Confucians were worried about what they saw as systems of ethical norms too far removed from our actual psychological dispositions. Tho I wouldn't even call certain religions of preaching foreign morality, it is not so much a product of religiosity, as it is humans losing their understanding of culture forms and the Mean of what it is to be human.
@@IotaEtaSigma Why not search your own morality instead, There is not record of the Sun bouncing around in the sky according to the observatories around the world which would confirm it is the result of mass optical hysteria, the same only happened in recent years in Ireland with a dancing statue. Think about it, which is more likely, an optical wobble or that the best a divine entity could do to communicate is wobble.
Sin keeps us from drawing near to God. He is too pure to behold evil. "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 6:23)
We don't go to Hell. We choose to go there. It's part of taking responsibility for your own behavior...people don't like the idea of "hell" because we live in a society where increasingly people look to blame others, alcohol, drugs, etc for their choices. Love does not require approval. Loving someone doesn't mean you have to approve of everything they do. Toxic, selfish, destructive or violent behavior always has consequences either in this world or the next.
If you ever had kids, would you create a torture chamber and allow them to go there for not loving you enough, or would you do everything in your power to stop them?
@@tomandrews1429 He did try to stop us. But we make the choice to reject Him. The proper analogy to what you said would be that the kids chose to leave the house. The Father says, "You can live here!" and they say, "I do not want to."
We aren't kids, we are adults. God provided the tools to avoid hell, we choose to either use those tools or not. We need to help ourselves and each other but ultimately our salvation is our own individual responsibility. Make wise choices, raise resilient faith-filled and faith-knowledgeable children, teach them how to make wise responsible choices. They may go off the path for a while but a strong foundation nearly always leads them back.
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker You need to be careful with the premise you just laid out. I'm not saying it's wrong, but it can be misunderstood to mean we can save ourselves. We cannot. We can only cooperate with the salvation. If we choose not to, then we go to hell. But we must maintain that we cannot save ourselves outside of God's grace. (I know this is the point you are making, hence your "God gives us the tools" and whatnot, but it's good to clarify this).
@@Arkangilos St Paul says 'work out your own salvation with fear and trembling'. The Catholic Church has the path lit for us focus on the path. It is all laid out there to help us but we being fallen humans often want to do what we want to do and too busy pointing out what each other or the "church/leaders" are doing. Too often we are like the Israelites complaining about the journey and our leaders and the food, getting distracted instead of focusing on the path to the destination.
I consider myself quite a devout practicing Catholic and have done for many years now. I believe 99.9% of the churches doctrine but i draw the line at the doctrine of An eternal hell of literal fire which is drawn from Greek mythology and i see it as borderline blasphemous. My reasoning is both scriptural and philosophically based, to anyone who believes this i ask how do you sleep at night? When I believed in this i spent the majority of my day thinking about how most of my loved ones and friends would ultimately end up there for something which is seemingly out of our control (unbelief is out of our control for many different reasons). Even more importantly however to support my belief is on the basis of the holy scriptures and gospel (good news) itself. All these scriptures and many many more directly state how all flesh shall be saved (1 Timothy 4:10, Romans 11:32, Romans 5:18, Titus 2:11, Luke 3:6, Ephesians 1:10, 1 John 2:2). You might reference Jesus talking about “eternal fire” And “eternal punishment”, the answer to this is three fold; -Firstly Jesus spoke only in parables to the peoples so why here is he suddenly talking literally? -Secondly, fire everywhere else in the bible fire is symbolic for purification (purgatory?) -And lastly the word ‘eternal’ was translated from the Greek ‘Eonian’ which means pertaining to an age to come, this makes even more sense in light of “eternal punishment” which is more accurately translated from the original Greek as ‘Eonian Chastisement’ (the age of chastisement, Chastisement meaning a punishment with aims of correction). Many of the early church fathers also believed in universal reconciliation- ie Gregory of Nyssa, Clement of Alexandria My belief does not take anything away from the just punishment and shame those who wilfully sin and reject Jesus will face but rather the never ending hell we have come to believe in (which closely mirrors that of greek paganism) is simply not true. There are a million other reasons and arguments for this view but this is the bread and butter. I just wanted to put this out there and I don’t expect a positive response persae as I’ve certainly found the idiom ‘hell hath no fury like a Christian challenged on the existence of hell’ to be true amongst both Catholic and especially protestant circles, some of whom almost idolise hell...
Further, to expand on my first part, if you reject one Dogma you cease being a Catholic by faith because you do not hold the Catholic Faith, you reject it. You become a protestant. This doesn't say you don't belong to the Church, you are still juridically a Catholic, but that is not the same as being Catholic by Faith.
As to the Saints that rejected it, they did not. It was officially condemned *after* the idea was put into question. So while they said maybe, the Church responded, "No."
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker The arguements made here still apply to all the scriptures in the article! The ‘Eternal’ we see in todays bibles was taken from the word ‘Eonian’ which means pertaining to an age. ‘Punishment’ is more accurately translated from the greek as ‘Chastisement’ which insinuates correction.
@@inthelionsden1 Chastisement does not insinuate correction. It is often *used* for correction, but it does not mean correction. It means beating. As for why "ages" are used, they say "ages upon ages" and "always and always" and "ever and ever" which means eternal.
“Masturbation is a mortal sin”? And everybody is just fine with the psychological damage these guys- for that matter, the church- are doing to countless innocent people? And these are the guys who say things like, “wake up, sheeple, and stop wearing your mask?” If there is a god of any sort at all, it’s a total jerk for allowing so much damaging distortion in its (many) name(s) throughout history.
Matt, you were right to feel uncomfortable when you described the (fictional) youth who masturbated while be aroused watching netflix going to hell. I'll sound like a Protestant here (so be it), but nowhere in the Bible is this mentioned. And also, this is a 'practice' that a vast majority of people do. God will send to hell (eternal torment for ever and ever) for that? Then hell will be very full. Why isn't (for example) meanness and slander and dishonesty considered a mortal sin? I'm sorry, but this topic (which young people seem to talk about a lot) just doesn't equate with a God who is just AND loving.
The moment I reconsider my rejection of faith, one that I, with great agony, walked away from 15 years ago (I was a pastor, for what it is worth)...I just watch a video like this. Then I'm reminded of the morality, or lack thereof, that I left behind. I mean this not as a personal attack, but rather a statement of fact. I'm quite sure you you, the owner of the channel, have not truly considered the moral ramifications of this belief to its full extent.Please consider this with an open mind. To claim your god isn't responsible for sending people to hell, when he alone created it, you're attempting in vain to square the circle - plain and simple. Under no definition of "morality" akin to anything we can understand would the architect of abject horror be let off the hook for billions of people being subjected to it by "their choice", when their choice in this instance (a) is often not even possible to make; (b) is based upon a book riddled with errors and contradictory narratives about the self-same deity demanding your allegiance (square, for example, a concise Easter narrative using all four gospels - you cannot), and (c) excludes even the 'mention' of hell (and no, the 'pit' isn't hell) for thousands of years to his so-called chosen people. The latter should concern you greatly: that the "prince of peace" ushered in a far greater punishment for non-allegiance than any of the so-called prophets prior. Did Yahweh not think this important enough to opine upon during, say, the authorship of the Pentateuch? Apparently not. Ask yourself why. You seem like a decent chap who enjoys contemplation, so I'd highly encourage you to dig into the perceived morality of this belief a bit further: that of an infinite punishment for what amounts to thought crime; the lack of belief. Do so considering that one cannot force oneself to believe anything. I challenge you to stop believing in water...or begin believing that Vishnu lives in my basement. Neuroscience has elucidated the fact that we don't even control our choices to begin with, with "decisions" made milliseconds before we consciously perceive them. On top of this, you did not choose your parents, your genetics, nor one cell in your brain. You were not given the mind of a psychopath, or one hopes. Nothing you are doing is of free will - not by any reasonable definition of the term. Yet your god uses 'that' to condemn trillions to, not just banishment, but eternal torture? Your deity could have made this simply "non-existence". After all, being without his presence would surely be considered a punishment if he exists. But he did not. He chose the worst possible outcome. "Could" a being defined as "love" even consider such a choice? A simple litmus test if you will: under what condition would you willingly allow "anyone" to make such a choice, in your words? Anyone at all? Hitler? A child rapist? Anyone? With the understanding that you would have to witness the consequence of this choice yourself forever, along with its effect on every one of this person's innocent relatives? Punishment, yes. Eternal torture? Think carefully. Now, apply this same standard to your own children. What would any of them have to do in order to justify, again in your words, "allowing them to choose torture forever" rather than to live under your roof? What sin would they have to commit to compel you to allow them to be harmed 'at all', let alone set afire for all of time? The latter is precisely what your god supposedly allows, not the former. Yet a moral person would object to the former as well. And if you object to either, you are more moral than your god - and any redefinition of the term, or appeal to "mystery", will not solve your dilemma. Therefore, your deity is not 'love', as no definition of love, outside the constrains and contortions placed on it by religion, would allow for such cruelty. However, if Yahweh is examined through the lens of what he actually was - a tribal war god of the early Hebrews, created from earlier gods (El, exposed to the Hebrews during Babylonian captivity) and an evolution from a polytheistic deity to a monotheistic one (albeit in a convoluted fashion that no one can really clarify) - and consider the cruelty of those generations of people, commands to commit genocide and employ slavery make perfect sense. Even the integration of hell by later Hellenized authors, all of whom were well-versed in the concept from their Grecian literary backgrounds, is understandable. But that leaves your deity on the pile of mythical beings, and trust me: I get how much that sucks. Perhaps that's not the conclusion you'll come to, and that's fine. But hopefully you'll, at the very least, examine why you continue to endorse doctrines that are blatantly immoral. Thanks.
@@nejileesansenpai More like God won't force himself with someone who doesn't want him. Or something like the gates of hell are locked from the inside. Now, what qualifies as denying God is another conversation.
I'm going to have to let this answer wash over me a few times. So much more there than our usually binary, short and sweet responses to try to contemplate this. Thanks for clipping it.
@@AConsumer999 But a good one. I say this as someone who struggles with it. The fact is we have to do whatever it takes to get over it. Either pushing through it with prayer (as one of my priests once told me, keep a rosary by your bed and grab that instead), getting rid of any source that can lead to it (even if that means no TV, Netflix, or free reign of internet), or going for runs.
This is a ridiculously antiquated way just to say yes we have hormones . Religious or not, this the absolute wrong man to talk to about them fir a few reasons !
What do you mean by "we have hormones"? If my neighbor has a beautiful wife seeing her will inevitably activate some neurochemical mechanism in my body that will make me desire her. Should I rape her and blame it on that neurochemical mechanism? Each desire or fear that we have triggers something in our body. It doesn't mean that we can blame our actions on biology.
@@Arkangilos I’m talking about other faiths. Muslims think you are a heretic. Calvinists think you are a heretic. Presbyterians think you are a heretic. Methodists think you are a heretic. On and on and on. Oh, yes, hell awaits you too. That’s the beauty of the religion racket...everyone is a heretic.
@@AndJusticeForMe When were they founded? What definition are we using? What authority do they have to call other Christians heretics? Where are you having this conversation? I don’t believe “truth is what you think it is.” The religions you mentioned were founded centuries after the Church specifically embracing heresies already defined by the Church. As a Catholic, who follows Catholic definitions, follows the one truth, it doesn’t matter what they think because they are literally heretics.
First thing you have to realize is that god isn't love, he is unquestioning obedience, disguised within the false pretense of love. If you removed the verses that specifically state god is love, and then read the story, you could never come to the conclusion that god is love. I'm sorry, but that is just how it is. If there was such a god, with the attributes Christians state their god has, he would be farther advanced than a human being from a one cell amoeba, now ask yourself... if you could create a one celled amoeba, could you in any way shape or form hold it accountable to being a one celled amoeba? And not living up to your standard/greatness? Of course not, it's just a ridiculous thought.
"Thus says The Lord: Behold, the corrupt doctrines of the churches of men have crept into every corner; near and far, the doctrine of hell and eternal torment is embraced by the people. Yet I tell you the truth, this doctrine is a loathsome spot on every garment worn in the name of truth! A detestable wrinkle within the tapestry of My glory! A horrible interwoven thread by which those who call of themselves Christian pollute My name and mar My image before the people, propagating that which came forth from the mouth of the dragon! THIS DOCTRINE IS EVIL! And must be opposed by all who have received the love of the Truth. For I have indeed spoken to this generation, even as I have spoken in all times past. For I AM THE LORD, The Light in whom there is no darkness at all." ~ "Thus says The Lord: Little flock, how is it you say within yourselves the way of The Lord is not equal? How is it you feel as though upon this servant I have poured a bounty, yet you remain desolate? Beloved ones, by whose power were you called forth into existence? To whose joy were you created? By whose favor were you born into this world by way of water and blood? Therefore, again I say to you, who you choose is everything. For I do not withhold My love, yet on account of your flesh you do always step backward. Consider the woman who touched My robes and was made whole. Tell Me, how is it that she received and you do not? Was she so highly favored, that she should receive and you should not? Beloved, come close and walk beside Me, for you are indeed highly favored! And all who grab hold of Me shall surely share in all that is Mine. Little flock, My ways are equal, yet the ways of My people remain unequal. For I have indeed poured out My life for you, yet each one must decide how deeply they drink. Do you not see? My blessings are equal for all who receive of My blessings, and My grace sufficient for all who trust in Me. Thus among those who come to Me, one is not favored over another, nor is My love bestowed by measure. Rather it is you who receive by measure, resisting on account of all these deceitful weights, trust which remains altogether lacking. Therefore do not confuse My love with the calling I have purposed for another, nor compare the gifts of the Spirit with The Blessing. For those I have called to serve shall indeed be given gifts, each in accordance with their faith and My will. And those who receive the greater gifts shall also bear the greater burden, even in the heat of the Day. Therefore, again I say to you, The Lord’s ways are indeed equal, Yet the ways of men remain unequal... Yet those who grab hold of their First Love With all their heart, with all their mind, With all their strength and with all their soul, Shall never go hungry, nor shall they thirst anymore; Nor shall the heat of the noonday Sun do them any harm... Yea, even all their tears shall be wiped away In the house of The Lord." trumpetcallofgod.com
O My Jesus Forgive Us Our Sins...Save Us From the Fires Of Hell..Lead All Souls To Heaven Especially Those In Most Need
Of Thy Mercy🙏🌹
Father White is always so illuminating. Filial Fear vs. Servile Fear is a very important distinction I wasn't aware of. Very helpful. God bless you both!
Father White makes a compelling argument. I actually first heard Hell explained in terms along those lines when I was church-shopping and dabbling Protestantism (long story for another day). Anyway, I was at a Bible study and the question of who goes to Hell and who does not came up (I think it was a faith versus works argument). The Pastor said something that took me back a bit. He said there isn't a soul in Hell who doesn't choose to be there. Like the point Father White makes, he said God will never force Himself on anyone and there are souls, even unto death, who will not reconcile themselves to God's grace. He made the case that Hell isn't fire and brimstone, it is the absence of God and everything good, loving, and decent. Cruelty and evil on a level we can't get our heads around.
I thought on this afterward and then the simple truth of that statement sort of struck home. I thought about people I knew, and people I know, people I love and have loved, who prefer or preferred a life of pain, a life characterized by drug abuse, sexual sin, and criminal behavior. It is hard for me to get my head around but the more I thought about the choices they made the more clearer it became in my mind anyway. The simple truth that came to the forefront was, if they chose Hell over Heaven while they are on Earth, why would they not choose Hell over Heaven when they leave it?
I recently thought/ read of something similar. Like Heaven/ purgatory and Hell is a choice of Soul after death (I know that purgatory as matter of choice is part of the Church teaching, however same can not be told about choice of Hell). I joint it with St. Faustina message of Divine Mercy and my theory is something like this. 1. God allows final repentance to every soul in moment of death. 2. The weight and magnitude of every commited sin is showed to us immidiately after our last breath. We do not understand its seriousness here on Earth but we will do after death. If you have unrepented/ unconfessed sins God will give you final chance (actually 3 chances according to St. Faustine) of repentance. But here comes the plotwist. The Soul is so ashamed of its sins that it voluntary chooses to go to Hell. It is so ashamed that it does not want God holy eyes to look at a soul. Even though that there is Jesus offering Mercy for that concrete soul. Lets say this is true. I can still appear in that position of that soul because I do not know the magnitude and seriousness of my sins and I may reject the offer of Divine Mercy when it comes. By praying for dying souls, by praying Divine Mercy chaplet, we are actually praying for them to be able to take that offered Divine Mercy from Jesus. Like someone says. The doors of the Hell are locked from inwards.
Please keep me in your prayers
No, you're going to fry in hell forever. I hope you like it hot.
@@mabusharn3761 what? no
Praying for you. Also, nice antelope.
@@shannonrouston3298 Thank you Shannon! I shot that one in the Red Desert in Wyoming!
@@caseymckee6856 that’s awesome!! I shot my first one out in Wyoming (I forget where) this past fall.
Matt really asks the honest questions.
I hope I can make it to heaven, just like Matt, I too had a dream where this lady was interviewed by the news, and said " this life does not compare to what comes after". And then all of the sudden I was in a dark room with barely any light coming in, and for some reason I saw the face of Padre Pio.
@@briendoyle4680 oi
@@briendoyle4680 ok edge lord
@@briendoyle4680 - guess you’ll find out if it is when ya die!
Hopefully you explore the thinking behind heaven and hell more before then!
@@briendoyle4680 I have no interest in engaging in any sort of theological dialogue with an edge lord. thanks for trying though!
@@briendoyle4680 - child abuse? Teaching morals and the truth of the universe?
Funny.
Those with faith have more stable marriages, more successful jobs, live more healthy and longer lives, and children do better in school on average.
So, how is that abuse?
Teaching love and responsibility?
For God so loved the world that He have his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
Past the servile fear!!!....Excellent Food For The Mind And Soul
My understanding has been that God doesn't send anyone to hell, everyone who is there made a conscious decision to go there by not living in the way that He expects us to. Living in sin, committing sacrilege by taking the Eucharist while not in a state of grace, making invalid confessions by intentionally not admitting them, etc. God wants us to be with Him, unfortunately we have the ability to choose otherwise.
@@gazagxrlx2974 care to elaborate?
@@gazagxrlx2974 ah I said something earlier but it didn’t send. Let me try to restate it in lighter terms. If I blow up ah building with your family in it and went to court and said oh well it’s only subjectively wrong and I didn’t do anything wrong actually I just murdered people. What would happen to me?
@@gazagxrlx2974 So if someone randomly kills you, did they do anything wrong?
@@gazagxrlx2974 You did not answer my question. If someone randomly murders you, was it bad?
@@gazagxrlx2974 how is that an appeal to emotions I asked if I murdered your family and we went to court and I told them good and evil don’t exist would I be put in prison for life or not?
No one can square the idea of an etneral punishment for a temporal crime.
what makes something objectively grave? I think that is the most confusing part of defining a mortal sin.
The error in the judgement of “unfairness” (apart from not understanding the processes of purgation/purification of the saved that - albeit in state of grace - are not perfected or yet purified to enter to the Heavenly Jerusalem) is to advocate for “eternity” and “eternal” meaning an “infinite amount of time”. The erroneous affirmation, in this sense, is of categories: eternity means not ‘during an infinite period of time’ but something that happens OUTSIDE of the very limitation of time. The eternal damned in hell will suffer punishment but NOT in the temporally-limited dimension. When we say the Son is begotten from the Father in eternity, it does not mean it took “forever” in this operation; rather it means that the eternal generation is definitely outside of the conditioned time.
The very concept of eternal punishment more than often is used wrongly by us because we grasp to understand eternity - due to our intellectual limitations - as if it meant an infinite sum of fractions of time, which is typical of our reasoning processes. Those questioning the proportionality of eternal damnation in general feel it has to do with the “measure of time” so as in the temporal dimension, but only with an infinite amount, as if it were referential to the “oikonomia” (the history of created things, meaning the very history of salvation, which is fully submitted to time and space) and not something that is post-economical. So some think that as even the greatest of mortal sinner can sin only during a limited time, therefore they are tempted to defend a version of universalism (‘apokatastasis’) according to which hell is only limited in time and all will be saved eventually.
‘Apokatastasis’ is one of the errors committed by the great Origen, very early theologian from the School of Alexandria, the “allegorical school”. It is very obscure to say it was officially condemned by the Popes or early Ecumenical Council, and I particularly think it was not. Even for Eastern Orthodoxy it is clearly minoritary to defend that ‘Apokatastatis’ is a proposition theologically acceptable. The well-know “Fifteen Canons Against Origenism” most probably existed as a document that endorse the magisterial teachings of the Bishos - although very polemical - and they condemned as heresy the theory of “universalism” (according to which all will be saved eventually), but the core polemics is that it most probably was NOT inserted in the obscure condemnations addressed to Origenism during the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (5th Ecumenical Council, 553AD), if only maybe in minor regional councils. Therefore, many speculative EO theologians try to defend that the hypothesis is not heterodox, using not only Origen, but specially the teachings of St Gregory of Nissa. But they seemed to be called as a “theolegoumenon”(theological speculation) that is outside of Sacred Tradition if Tradition is seen as a whole, and one that is not defensible if the Sacred Scriptures are interpreted to all of the consequences. So it seems a little confusing (as many cases can doctrinally be, to be sincere, among EO differentiation between teachings and theological speculation).
According to my understandings, on the other hand (take me not as any authority, please), universalism (‘Apokatastasis’) was for sure collaterally condemned by the Council of Trent in the decrees of justification and the way they correlate eternal damnation with free will and grace. So it is NOT possible to defend ‘Apokatastasis’ for a Catholic any longer, even though we may speculate how it can inform the theological virtue of hope - but we can’t simply deny i) the reality of hell and ii) the eternity of damnation, under the correct concept for it.
Seems legit
The way some would describe it, my mother is in Hell, and while I think of myself as a good and obedient Catholic, that is one thought I cannot abide. I pray for her ALL the time and hope in God.
@Oskar The error in the judgement of “unfairness” (apart from not understanding the processes of purgation/purification of the saved that - albeit in state of grace - are not perfected or yet purified to enter to the Heavenly Jerusalem) is to advocate for “eternity” and “eternal” meaning an “infinite amount of time”. The erroneous affirmation, in this sense, is of categories: eternity means not ‘during an infinite period of time’ but something that happens OUTSIDE of the very limitation of time. The eternal damned in hell will suffer punishment but NOT in the temporally-limited dimension. When we say the Son is begotten from the Father in eternity, it does not mean it took “forever” in this operation; rather it means that the eternal generation is definitely outside of the conditioned time.
The very concept of eternal punishment more than often is used wrongly by us because we grasp to understand eternity - due to our intellectual limitations - as if it meant an infinite sum of fractions of time, which is typical of our reasoning processes. Those questioning the proportionality of eternal damnation in general feel it has to do with the “measure of time” so as in the temporal dimension, but only with an infinite amount, as if it were referential to the “oikonomia” (the history of created things, meaning the very history of salvation, which is fully submitted to time and space) and not something that is post-economical. So some think that as even the greatest of mortal sinner can sin only during a limited time, therefore they are tempted to defend a version of universalism (‘apokatastasis’) according to which hell is only limited in time and all will be saved eventually.
‘Apokatastasis’ is one of the errors committed by the great Origen, very early theologian from the School of Alexandria, the “allegorical school”. It is very obscure to say it was officially condemned by the Popes or early Ecumenical Council, and I particularly think it was not. Even for Eastern Orthodoxy it is clearly minoritary to defend that ‘Apokatastatis’ is a proposition theologically acceptable. The well-know “Fifteen Canons Against Origenism” most probably existed as a document that endorse the magisterial teachings of the Bishos - although very polemical - and they condemned as heresy the theory of “universalism” (according to which all will be saved eventually), but the core polemics is that it most probably was NOT inserted in the obscure condemnations addressed to Origenism during the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (5th Ecumenical Council, 553AD), if only maybe in minor regional councils. Therefore, many speculative EO theologians try to defend that the hypothesis is not heterodox, using not only Origen, but specially the teachings of St Gregory of Nissa. But they seemed to be called as a “theolegoumenon”(theological speculation) that is outside of Sacred Tradition if Tradition is seen as a whole, and one that is not defensible if the Sacred Scriptures are interpreted to all of the consequences. So it seems a little confusing (as many cases can doctrinally be, to be sincere, among EO differentiation between teachings and theological speculation).
According to my understandings, on the other hand (take me not as any authority, please), universalism (‘Apokatastasis’) was for sure collaterally condemned by the Council of Trent in the decrees of justification and the way they correlate eternal damnation with free will and grace. So it is NOT possible to defend ‘Apokatastasis’ for a Catholic any longer, even though we may speculate how it can inform the theological virtue of hope - but we can’t simply deny i) the reality of hell and ii) the eternity of damnation, under the correct concept for it.
@Oskar No problem, my friend, it is because you are preaching ‘Apokatastatis’ in almost every post. I will come later to a fuller response to you, specially on the morality aspects. English is not my first language, so I am not a prolific writer in English. Therefore I will take some time. And I will show the wrongness and the absolute risk of your position, how it can (and does) lead to moral relativism and indifferentism and so forth. The many deficiencies on eschatology is responsible for the spiritual state of affairs in the present days and I will come later to them to show how disturbing, practically incorrect and morally unacceptable the theory is. Please do not reduce my argument as if whatever I say to you is that I am dichotomizing “dogma” x “Christ’s love”, which is simply a strawman so outside of the range of the discussion (but I can come with some things written about how wrong those conceptions of God’s love can be). Respectfully.
@Oskar it is impossible to love Christ while rejecting His truth (dogma). It is impossible to love Christ when you keep calling Him a liar.
I'm sorry to say this, but you know that God is just and cannot allow a soul who died in mortal sin to avoid just punishment.
She is probably in Hell. I'm really sorry it turned out like this.
@@lucasprzybyla7084 he is. Oskar is ignoring what Christ said and pretending that he said something else.
God is not a monster
Thank you for asking thing question brother. Hell is something I've really struggled with.
@@iraborpeter Is this a Pints With Aquinas Spam account? Feels like a really niche spam account I click on the profile and it has two subscribers.
Fr. Thomas Joseph White's is one of my favorites! Thanks for hosting him. Matt, I truly appreciate these short takes.
That was such a brilliant answer. I honestly cant think of a better explanation.
@@lucasprzybyla7084 do you not understand what he says? Watch it again.
Thanks for the video. I appreciated Fr Thomas' insights
Asking all the great questions! Good on you, mate!
Why is masturbation a mortal sin? I'm new to all this. Please point out the passage in the New and Old Testament.
For anybody who says that people can't choose hell for themselves - have you ever met a drug addict or been addicted to drugs yourself? I think if we look around us we see that people choose hell for themselves all the time.
I know that God is infinitely just. So I guess I find solace in the fact that even if I'm in hell, I'll know exactly what I did to end up there. I won't feel like I was put there unjustly.
I hope that nobody ends up there but I think we need to be careful not to let wishful thinking lead us to be more willing to sin. "Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom". God bless all you. I hope you find salvation.
Do you understand what addiction is and means? Many serious drug addicts don't want to keep using drugs, but they are compelled to by their body's chemistry. Just like no one would actually choose to be tortured for all eternity, no drug addict wants to remain in their current state, they're just trapped.
Let me ask you then, if you do wind up in hell, what did you do to end up there?
@@tomandrews1429 I won't pretend to know. I don't have the divine knowledge that God does. All I know is that my life has been a series of selfish behavior and turning away from love, and I pray for God's help every day to turn away from that sin. Without God's grace I would continue to sin forever.
@@tylerjarjoura3270 Well then I'm confused. First you say you'll know exactly what put you there, now you say you don't know.
If hell is real, shouldn't God make the rules for who goes there crystal clear for us while we're on earth?
@@iraborpeter Did someone hack your account Matt? This doesn't make any sense.
@@tomandrews1429 this is a fake account with the same name which has only 2 subscribers
Very well put Father Thomas, the difference between excited occasion and forethought when it comes to mortal sin, thank you. As it describes a range of sin and the activities leading to sin, is information that would have been useful to my goddaughter before she passed away 🕇
@@iraborpeter thank you for your comments, .., evil women and evil spirits are entities that I have been dealing with since 1995 (January). At that time God took me out of my body and took me home and into Himself, .., for a chat, .., our Mother has been my companion with our Lord ever since, and that is; I am now aware of their continued presence. My Goddaughter is safely home and did convert from exercising witchcraft to being Ukrainian Catholic (having been a catechumen for three years), what a joy and I can still taste that. There will be evil doers in the future on my pathway, hopefully God calls them to conversion and if He chooses me to help with catechism for those people then that will be so joyfully accepted by me and our Mother of whom Jesus said that I must pilgrimage with. I am an injured worker living in Alberta having to deal with wcb and its compensation which brings me to a sad point of having to say that I am sorry but I do not have enough money to provide charity to others much less feel so bad about not being able to contribute to the collection plate at my diocese, qnd with my Bishops permission I can attend Mass and contribute if and when I can. I am sorry that I cannot give to your recommended charity and continue to provide assistance to Injured workers free of charge. I was taught wcb material and will give freely the help all of us injured employees need 🕇God help us all and Blessings to you and I will keep the child and family as well you in my prayers🕇
My question is about proportionality. My sense is that even the worst sinners, for example, the mass murderers and dictators, serial rapists etc, can only ever commit a finite number of mortal sins before they die. So if the sinfulness of even the worst sinners is limited in this sense, how can the punishment be forever, that is, unlimited in time?
Chris, it is not a Medieval invention. Be careful. Those who say it to you represent a risk to your soul at the very least.
The very concept of eternal punishment more than often is used wrongly by us, because we grasp to understand eternity - due to out intellectual limitations - as if it meant an infinite sum of fractions of time. Those questioning the proportionality of eternal damnation in general feel it has to do with the measure of time so as in the temporal dimension, in the “oikonomia” (in the history of created things, the very history of salvation, submitted to time and space): as even the greatest of mortal sinner can sin only in a limited time, therefore many are tempted to defend some sort of version of universalism (‘apokatastasis’).
The error is to advocate for “eternity” and “eternal” meaning an infinite amount of time. The error is categorical: eternity means not during an infinite period of time, but something that happens outside of the limitation of time. That’s only this. The eternal damned in hell will suffer punishment outside of the temporally-limited dimension. When we say the Son is begotten from the Father in the eternity, it does not mean it takes “forever” in the operation, but that the “eternal” generation is outside of the conditioned time.
‘Apokatastasis’ is one of the errors committed by the great Origen, very early theologian from the School of Alexandria or the “allegorical school”. It is very obscure to say it was officially condemned by the popes or early Ecumenical Council, and I particularly think it was not, but it was collaterally condemned by the Council of Trent in the decrees of justification and the way it correlates the eternal damnation with free will. So it is NOT possible to defend ‘Apokatastasis’ for a Catholic.
Even for Eastern Orthodoxy it is clearly very minoritary to defend ‘Apokatastatis’ is a proposition theologically acceptable. The well-know “Fifteen Canons Agains Origenism” existed - albeit very polemical - and condemned as heresy the theory of “universalism” (according to which all will be saved eventually), but the polemics is that it most probably was NOT inserted in the obscure condemnations addressed during the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (5th Ecumenical Council), during 553AD. Therefore, many speculative EO theologians try to defend this hypothesis as not heterodox, using not only Origen, but specially the teachings of St Gregory of Nissa. But they seemed to be called as a “theolegoumenon”(theological speculation) outside of Sacred Tradition and not possible if the Sacred Scriptures are interpreted to all its consequences. So it seems a little confusing (as many cases can doctrinally be, to be sincere, in EO).
@Oskar I will come later to a fuller response to you, specially on the morality aspect of the discussion. English is not my first language, so I am not a prolific writer in English. Therefore I will take some time. And I will show the wrongness and the absolute risk of your position, how it can (and does) lead to moral relativism and indifferentism and so forth. The many deficiencies on eschatology is responsible for the spiritual state of affairs in the present days and I will come later to them to show how disturbing, practically incorrect and morally unacceptable the theory is. Please do not reduce my argument as if whatever I say to you is that I am dichotomizing “dogma” x “Christ’s love”, which is simply a strawman so outside of the range of the discussion (but I can come with some things written about how wrong those conceptions of God’s love can be). Respectfully.
Because God is infinite, an offense against Him is infinite. If an offense is infinite, only two things can happen. Infinite punishment, or infinite atonement. Christ (who is infinite) died to offer the infinite atonement.
@@masterchief8179 Thank you for this contribution Master Chief. Please explain a bit more about the end of time and the nature of the situation that is, as it were, beyond time. It seems that time began with the creation, and there are many references to the end of time. Is the state of things after the end of time something like an eternal present? Are there any helpful metaphors in scripture or any plausible philosophical accounts of this state?
@Catalina Silos great answer
POPE JOHN PAUL II: Can God, who loves man so much, permit the man who rejects him to be condemned to eternal torment? The silence of the church is, therefore, the only appropriate position for Christian faith. Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, “It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Mt. 26:24) his words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation.
Hell is the suffering of being unable to love...
But why does God create an human that can go to Hell, I Don't understand.
@@tomasparra720 There is a simple answer. Religion is false, and the God they believe in does not exist. Not saying there is no God. But the specific God they believe in, is made up
@Harry Waddington so someone who choose to have different believes and different opinions and have every right to not support someone in their free will deserve to burn in hell and be tortured forever?
@Harry Waddington so by your logic if someone does not like bts or support them it's a fair punishment to send them to a place where they get Tortured and in pain forever?
Please for our pope, priests, nuns and world leaders.
The torturous fires of hell, the cleansing fires of purgatory, are they the same fires? The Seraphim (the fiery ones) are the nearest angels to GOD because they are said to burn with the greatest love for Him. Could it all be the same fire? Could the effects of these fires on our immortal souls be dependent on our love for GOD?
You're impersonating Matt Fradd.
Hell was created for the devil and his angels but if you reject Jesus Christ that's where you will be going. Whether you believe that or not.
As St. Padre Pio has said, the souls that go to hell are not because God wants them to go there but because these souls are the those that refuse to ask for God's forgiveness, those souls that refuse to ask for God's mercy.
Who/what determines how souls are? Can souls change?
@Contro Corrente I'm not a great scholar or theologian but I can answer you as one brought up in my Catholic faith: The purpose of our souls is to love our Creator. ❤ That love is meant to be shared with others and in His creation that is why He gave us life on earth. But God also loves us sooo much that He gave us free will. Even the free will to "not love Him back." 💔 And how we live our lives on earth is a reflection of that choice.
But God never stops loving and pursuing the sinner, even at the hour of their death. God never abandons us whether it is in times of joy or suffering. It is we who abandon Him always. 💔
God be with you my friend. ❤ 🙏
@Oskar My friend, I will do my best to answer this based on my faith.
God disciplines His children daily. He works through the people in our lives and in our life experiences. He tests our faith in Him by allowing pain and suffering. He rejoices with us when we experience joy. He protects us from our bad choices by redirecting us to something better. From the moment we wake up until the end of the day, we have the choice to do all that pleases Him. To do only what is good despite our imperfections. To exercise virtues daily. To keep trying our best to return to Him when we fall again into sin - when we feel lost and afraid.
But by giving us free will, God knows that there will be those people "who will willingly choose evil." Take note that sin is a fruit of evil but not necessarily evil itself (as what Catholicism teaches). God loves sinners but He despises evil. God always pursues sinners and wants to win them over. Sinners repent and a lot of them can change for the better. But one who willingly chooses evil, dies in a state of evil.
But what I also love about Catholicism is that we recognize and accept that Hell is real but we don't try to focus on that. Growing up Catholic, I was always taught by my parents and our mother Church that the reason we follow and love God is because we were made for Him and our hearts were made to love Him. It is not the idea that: "we do all that is good and pleasing to the Lord just to avoid Hell."
If we focus on "avoiding Hell", then we are wasting our time. Our focus should be living a life of holiness to please God because we love Him. But most people on earth do not live good lives - most live selfish lives and are too attached to earthly things. That is why the concept of Hell is unfair. That is why the concept of eternal punishment seems unfair.
Don't worry my friend. ❤ Why focus on Hell when the mercy of our Lord is infinite and His love is abundant? Let us ask for His love and mercy always. ❤ In Catholicism, we call it the Divine Mercy. ❤
Like as St. Padre Pio said (one of my favorite saints), the souls who are in Hell are those that refuse to ask for God's mercy.
@Oskar When I was younger, I had to attend Catechism, theology and philosophy classes at my Catholic school. And I was overwhelmed by the different theologies from the early Church fathers up until the modern Catholic Church. We had a lot of debates in class. And I remember being just like you, who wanted an explanation to everything because even the great Catholic Doctors of the Church contradicted each other. And there was a point when I got so confused on what to believe, I had a mental breakdown and had to talk to our school chaplain (and he eventually became my spiritual director ❤).
I can never forget what he told me. And he handed me a prayer card with a quote by St. Thomas Aquinas - until now, that quote is one of my favorites to whisper to myself, especially when times are very confusing and overwhelming.
I am not a member of any religious order, not a priest/nun or a theologian or great scholar. I am just a simple person who wants to do her best in being a good Catholic daughter especially during these difficult times when I have to be a pillar of strength to my family. 💔
Maybe someone like you will shine in the field of philosophy or theology. ❤ I think you should pursue it, if you are considering that in the future. 😊 But for a simple person like me, this quote from a dear saint has made much more sense than everything I had learned about Catholicism in school:
"To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible."
- Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church
my question is: if you are not in a state of grace and you know that, so you ask God for forgiveness in an imperfect way and want to go to confession as soon as possible and then you die... it would seem unjust for you to go to hell, but because you didn’t have perfect contrition and didn’t confess then i think you will be going to hell.
am I wrong? do i have a false understanding? it just seems unjust
There is your disposition to go as soon as possible to the sacrament. God see the disposition of your heart. So there is a desire of reconciliation with God. That is the essence of a perfect contrition.
Imperfect contrition is when you are sorry because you don't want to go to hell, and you don't give up attachment to sins. Think, "I don't want to go to hell, so I will confess, but I'm not going to do much to change my life because I still enjoy certain things".
Perfect contrition is when you are sorry because you offended God, and you want to give up your sins ( *all* of them).
Confession is necessary for both to be forgiven, but you can see why just being "sorry" isn't enough in the first case. You are sorry, but you aren't sorry for love, you are sorry for selfish reasons. While you may not intend to do that specific sin again, you may enjoy gossiping too much to give it up. That shows your focus is still too inward. In this case yeah, you'd still go to hell.
However, we do not know the state of others souls, and we rarely even know the true state of our soul, so if you sin, just do your best to give it all up. As long as you actively move towards God, even if you commit a mortal sin, and you sincerely push for it, and sincerely attempt to remove occasions of sin and attachment of sins in your life, you'll be on the right road. The idea is to give up sin and look forwards to God. If you spend your time in prayer and movement towards the goal, you'll be better off. Leave the rest in God's hands.
@@AConsumer999 Confession is ok for imperfect, but perfect is required if you cannot get to confession. As for the "I forgot to confess such and such!" is usually covered during confession when you end and say, "For these sins and any I have forgotten, I am sorry." If you don't say that I recommend it. I didn't think about it until I read something either from St. Francis, the TLM missal, or the 1890's "The Catechism Explained" (that's right, the 1890's, not the 1990's).
@@Arkangilos "You aren't sorry for love, you are sorry for selfish reasons." I'd argue that any for of contrition is inherently selfish. Catholics don't love God because they know Him. They love God because they were taught they MUST love Him or else. Similar to how Chinese citizens are taught to love their country before anything else.
Why do you love God? You're taught that if you love Him and live his commandments that you will be rewarded (selfish). And you are also taught if you don't love Him, you go to hell and are tortured forever and ever. So people want to save their own skin which is also selfish.
Even if we look past the indoctrination that you HAVE to love Him for salvation, let's just say that you are taught He made all things and He loves you more than anyone else loves you. You might develop personal feelings that you want to please Him, but this is just a transactional relationship which can also be viewed as selfish.
@@rambo3rd471 I don't love Him because I want to go to heaven. I don't even presume to think I'll get there, and I certainly don't deserve to be. I love Him because He gave me life, gave me a family, gave me legs, arms, eyes, friends, etc. Because He has helped me.
I don't know anyone who loves God because He'll send them to hell if they don't. The only people I know that use hell as you did are atheists. Every single Christian I know, from Catholic to Calvanists, love God because we want to.
I personally don't try to follow His commandments because I'll go to hell if I don't, I try to follow His commandments because they are good in themselves, and I have *never* met a single miserable person who has followed His commandments. I myself was far more miserable when I slept around and acted contrary to His commands.
Do not presume to judge why people love God.
Psalm 9:17
King James Version
17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.
"And Hades gave up its dead and those whose names were not written in the book of life were cast into the Lake of Fire". That's pretty clear cut. You can't send yourself to Hell. God puts you there. "The Gates of Hell are locked from the inside" is a rationalization from CS Lewis who bordered on Universalism.
Proverbs 4:23
Matthew 6:21
Luke 12:34
Jeremiah 17:9
Matthew 15:19
Mark 7:21
How on earth can anyone know whether God is infinitely just or wise or good. The fact is, no one knows anything of the kind, but a great many people want it to be so. I wouldn't want to rely on the goodness or justice of someone who consigns anyone to eternal punishment.
It strikes me as fitting. Consider the fact that we're able to love at all. If God created us why would it not be fitting that He be the Source of love?
@@frjohn413 So is he then also the source of evil? If God created the world, why would it not be fitting that he be the source of all evil?
@@frjohn413 And of course, if one is a Christian, one has to find a way of extrapolating that God is the source of all good but in no way the source of any evil. That truly is a difficult feat to accomplish! Philosophers and theologians have attempted such but accomplished only the most mediocre solutions, at best. Ordinary folks look the conundrum in the eye and think - BS, hogwash, makes no sense! (On account of ordinary folks being more in communion with real life, real problems that is). I'd say that someone who genuinely believes that anyone, almost no matter what their crime, deserves eternal punishment for said crime/s, must him/herself be in urgent need of psychiatric diagnosis. Finite crimes and eternal punishments? Just contemplate the implications of such. A "god" who mandated eternal punishments would inevitably be more evil and immoral than any human could conceivably ever be.
@@laurameszaros9547 Because evil is parasitic on the good. Evil is the absence of Good. Lucifer rebelled against God, as did Adam and Eve. Evil is a deprivation of goodness, goodness in that case taking the form of obedience. God was therefore indirectly (or accidentally, as Aquinas says) the cause of evil.
@@laurameszaros9547 Read what Aquinas says about this in the Summa. Anything but mediocre.
Amazing clip! 🙏🏽♥️
People choose Hell, God allows it out of justice. Great program, thanks Matt!
Sure he does.That's why he created eternal torture. But let's not lay an ounce of blame on the 'creator' of the worst place imaginable. Instead, let's lay the "bad choice" blame on humans who lack belief in a book full of contradictions and horrific moral values. Sounds absolutely fair to me.
@Oskar Don’t accuse others of speaking out of ignorance when you have no clue what sacred Scripture says.
@@rationalmuscle sounds to me like you just want to justify your own choices.
@@rationalmuscle torment *
@Oskar you are the one calling Christ a liar, not me.
Proverbs 11:21
New International Version
21 Be sure of this: The wicked will not go unpunished,
but those who are righteous will go free.
The whole argument that "God sends no one to hell, they choose to go" has always struck me as inadequate. St. Paul says we "see through a glass darkly," so can any decision we make really be given with "full knowledge and consent?" We are flawed and finite beings. Seeing clearly is a lifelong process. We say God is just, but a god that would allow someone to go into eternal torment based on finite sins committed with imperfect human frailty and knowledge hardly seems just to me. Another problem I have with the Christian Hell doctrine is that the words we translate as "hell" in the Bible don't refer to the our modern concept of a fiery place of torment. There are only 3 words used: Sheol (which was equivalent to the bleak afterlife of Hades), Gehenna (a physical location outside Jerusalem that had a nasty history of idolatry and child sacrifice) , and one instance of "tartarus," used only once by Saint Peter in one of his letters. It's hard to translate, but most scholars interpret it as "Pit." None of those words imply the hell of Christianity, which developed more out of poetic works like Dante and was influenced by Greek ideas of the afterlife. My point here is that I think Father meant well, and he's doing his best to help Matt tease out this difficult question. But his explanations for why God would "allow" someone to go to Hell are what I've heard a thousand times, and all it does is generate fear and anxiety towards a God we're all told is supposed to be good. We need to stop motivating people to do good through fear. The doctrine of hell is problematic and cultivates an immature faith based on punishment rather than love.
I'm not an universalist by any means, but authors like DBH pose some good challenges to the traditional infernalist view. It's worth checking those up.
Certainly many of the Church fathers - not merely Gregory of Nyssa and Origen - held universalist views.
I dare not defy my God and say all men will certainly be saved, for He certainly warned us about these fires. I believe for good reason. But reason such as I have it does tell me a finite creature will be damned eternally for finite reason and apparently finite will and emotion. And I am unsure of this.
@@HolyKhaaaaan I would just recall what Christ said when He was asked if many would be saved:
Matthew 7:14. “Narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and few there be who find it.”
Mathew 22:14 “Many are called, but few are chosen”
Luke 13
13:23 And a certain man said to him: Lord, are they few that are saved? But he said to them:
13:24 Strive to enter by the narrow gate: for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter and shall not be able.
All of the Church Fathers held a consensus on a literal hell that is real.
@@HolyKhaaaaan Origen is not a Church Father. You must have a Catholic and orthodox faith to be called a Father, not just by existing in the patristic period.
@Oskar It’s clear you haven’t read scripture, considering Christ and all His apostles say many will go to hell for all eternity, and few will go to heaven.
Because in this one life they have not proved they are able to do more good than bad. Judgement Day.
Why conversion matters.
God does not "send" anyone to hell......people choose hell. And God loves them enough not to force them into His presence forever "against" their will.
@Oskar You need to get the "Dante's inferno" conception of "HELL" out of your mind. What makes you think "hell" is such a bad place?? Hell is simply a "state of being" where "God" is completely removed. Isn't that what you want?? God has ZERO to do with hell. There, you are finally FREE!!!. No more God.....no more rules......no more commandments.....no more judgements......no more SIN. SIN is a behavior that is "repugnant" to God. But God has nothing to do with hell....so He will no longer be offended.
.....I just don't understand.....isn't that what you "atheists'" want??? No God.....all freedom??
@Oskar
YOU SAID, "where God is completely removed, that's impossible. " 100% your opinion. where's your proof of that?? Where's your proof it's impossible?
YOU SAID, "God is everywhere present and fills all things. There is no existence without the presence of God, ever."
...again just your opinion. So you're saying that God is incapable of creating a state void of His presence?? God's not "powerful" enough to create Hell??? ......AGAIN, that's just YOUR opinion.....and YOUR opinion has ZERO authority.
YOU SAID, "God does not "get offended", he is not some psychological entity, like Zeus or Odin. God is not arbitrary."
....again, just your opinion. 100% OPINION
YOU SAID, "Free will in Christianity does NOT mean the ability to arbitrarily choose between God or Not-God, it means having your will freed from ignorance and the bondage of sin so that your will can naturally "choose" God."
......AGAIN....just your OPINION. that's just YOUR personal philosophy of Christianity!! It means ABSOLUTELY nothing!!!
YOUR claims have ZERO authority!!! If you think they do.....please tell me where your authority comes from??
@Oskar Yeah....start naming some of these "theologians"?
YOU SAID, "Where does my authority come from? How about every competent Theologian ever? "
Oaky....name them.....name a Theologian that thinks God is not powerful enough to create a state of being void of Himself??
YOU SAID, "This is the way that Christianity has always conceived of God. God is not some powerful being out there making decisions as he pleases, he is Being-itself. "
JUST YOUR OPINION!! I don't know of any theologian that thinks God does not or cannot "make decisions"......that makes no sense.
YOU SAID, "Any Catholic priest will tell you the same thing since it's Catholic dogma"....
......God is Being itself.....yes that is true.....but you're acting as if God is mute or somehow not involved, or incapable of making decisions with His creations. I don't know ANY priest that thinks that.
Again, all these thing you think ARE JUST YOUR OPINIONS!!! where's your support for any of these ideas???
Let's cut through the nonsense.......let me ask a question (that I almost guarantee you won't answer directly).....what church do you go to??? You're clearly a protestant of some ilk....so do tell.....what denomination are you??
@Oskar Right.....it's all nonsense.....it's just YOUR opinions.
Augustine and Aquinas NEVER taught that God was somehow "unable" to remove His presence from Hell. God can do ANYTHING He chooses to do.
God is in NO WAY bound to the limitations of human reason and logic......that's hilarious!!
I don't blame you for keeping your church hidden (just like I predicted you would).......if I went to your church, I would keep it a secret too.
YOU SAID, "The problem with Christianity for the most part is this simple minded fanaticism and dogma worship."
Just YOUR OPINION....means nothing.....has ZERO authority.
YOU SAID, " It's always sad when someone makes an Idol out of the Church instead of following Christ."
......just more opinion without authority....means ZERO. And YOU follow Christ, right?? In a church you're to cowardly to name....LOL...okay, sounds right....typical protestant mumbo jumbo lol
@Oskar ...Right lol
This was a great full video, but this answer was (inevitably, I think) the weakest moment. Keep asking this question, Matt, because I sense your God-given intuition and reason continue to find Fr.'s answer less than solid.
Hey @MattFradd you've got an impersonator here. I've reported them.
When you *LOVE* SIN then you CHOOSE Hell.
Matt, my dear brother in Christ-this is where my Protestant (or Reformed Catholic!) heart *breaks* over your anxiety. Yes, it does seem bloody unfair in the case of a college student who masturbates and goes to hell in your scenario. Why? Because it is utterly *unfitting*. In that situation, it’s a college student who tries to resist, tries to not fall, but does and then dies. But Matt, this is where our respective theologies make a colossal difference.
As a Roman Catholic, you have to say that this guy committed a mortal sin and, potentially, fell out of grace and is going to hell. As an Anglican, with other Protestants, I can say “no. If this student had an overarching disposition of repentance-he resisted, he fell, but he repents and strives to fight sin (or would have had he not died)-then God-given faith is alive in this man. This is incredibly huge. For us, by faith alone you’re united to Christ-and Christ, by faith, will never leave us or forsake us. He dwells in us, and the reality of constant repentance is evidence that he is in us (which is why Luther called the whole Christian life a life of repentance). You *can* have assurance. Obviously, unrepentant sin ought to darken someone’s assurance-faith without works is a dead faith. But by faith, you are united to Christ and made a new creation; and the life of obedience necessary to salvation is a life already contained within the principle of repentant faith.
I think it seems unfair or unfitting because such a person *does* have the life of God in Christ in them. If they are repentant, striving for holiness, and gradually growing in holiness (however slowly), then the Spirit is at work.
Matt, you don’t have to give up everything you love about Catholicism to get the best of both Catholicism and Protestantism. Have you ever considered Anglicanism? We think we have all of the above: continuity in apostolic succession, the insights of the Reformation, the general ecclesial structure of the Catholic Church (minus the primacy of the bishop of Rome), etcetera. And we have a rich sacramental life. There are treasures of assurance for you in Reformed Catholicism brother!
@@anglicanaesthetics If they are repentant then even in the Catholic Church they would be forgiven. I don't see the issue you are bringing up.
@@anglicanaesthetics Nah I love being Catholic with the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ ✝️ in the Holy Eucharist and with the Blessed Virgin Mary.
You should check out Swedenborg
If you reject God's son Jesus Christ you will go to hell. Because He died and shed his blood in our place, he took all of our sins upon himself as a sacrifice and if you reject him there is no other place for your soul to go but to hell for eternity because the soul lives forever. This is keeping it simple while others complicate it with many words.
How can I reject something that you can’t even prove exist.
God is not love God is good. good is more important than love because many people love evil
What l can't understand is it took God billions of years to create the earth and the cosmos and it is not done yet but we have to perfect ourselves in the space of one lifetime and if we can't accomplish that we spend eternity in hell !!! So hard to be a good Catholic l feel as if l have the sword of Damocles over my head.
Live in the state of Grace, pray the Mercy Chapel, ask a priest to give you a scapular
My belief is that your sins are forgiven if you believe that Jesus dies on the cross for you. If you truly believe that, then you should want to work towards becoming a better Christian and following the teachings in the Bible. None of us will ever be perfect, we're all sinners like the Bible states. I feel it's easy to get overwhelmed, trying to be "perfect" which we'll never obtain. Just accept that you're a sinner, and try to do better. Like Fr. Thomas Joseph Points out that when our time is up, God knows what's in our hearts.
So this priest would say that Hell and Heaven are the same place but with a different disposition?
Maybe God gives us all the opportunity to choose him regardless of what sins we died with. Do we truly desire Him and Him alone? I have a hard time believing God sends one to hell who truly loves Him. Focus more on your heart's desire for heaven and less on whether you've "earned" eternal union with the Father.
One who truly loves Him will do what they can to not sin.
@@Arkangilos Absolutely. If one died without confessing, like the example Matt mentioned in the video, does that sin dictate thier fate? I would think it's possible that thier relationship with God has more weight than a single weak moment.
@@michaelisbell1848 Well, like the Dominican said, we do not know how culpable he was to it. We can only pray for his soul.
It's one thing to assume he will be ok or he will be in hell. It's another to say, "This is a mortal sin, if you commit a mortal sin you are cut off from God. Work not to sin."
The first is a judgment, the second is a warning, or a teaching. I can give warnings and teachings about the fate of those who sin mortally without judging their soul.
@@Arkangilos Agreed. Very well said. Turning away from what we know separates us from God, without regarding final judgment, is enough to sin no more.
@Oskar Read. The. Bible. Stop repeating that offensive line and of using Christ of lying.
5:50, powerful.
Got to love an OP 😁
What is an OP ?
@@jen9774 It stands for "Order of Preachers" - otherwise known as the Dominican order. Members of that order have "OP" after they're name to denote their affiliation. They're typically smart haha.
Do you not believe that Jesus suffered and died on the cross for ALL of our sins, past, present and future?
Should we repent, yes, of course. If the individual in question has accepted Jesus Christ as His Lord and Savior He is saved for all eternity and will spend eternity in the presence of The Lord.
Your last breathe on earth is your first breathe in Heaven.
We should never presume to know God’s actions between the first and last breathe!
He is GOD, He does the impossible if He chooses too.
We all sin and fall short daily, we should never stand in judgment of others regarding their Salvation.
That decision is Gods, His alone!
Even Sacred Scripture says you can fall again after you are baptized, and says that if you do you will go to hell.
The flesh is weak...
Can we hear about culpable ignorance?
For me Hell has never bothered me, might be because of my Confucianism. Hell describes perfectly the end state of a man who have failed to fulfill his nature endowed by and the will of Heaven (God). If anyone, or me, end up in Hell then I know it is because one deserves it. God's love is also his justice.
"How vast is God, the ruler of men below! How arrayed in terrors is God, with many things irregular in his ordinations! Heaven gave birth to the multitudes of the people, but the nature it confers is not to be depended on. All are [good] at first, but few prove themselves to be so at the last." -Book of Odes
My main dislike of heaven and hell (In all religions) is that it teaches people to be insincere, they preach to follow a religion simply because of profit/advantages, as opposed to getting to actualize ones potential in this world and through it know the Will of God.
Great video and Matt doesn't hold back on his vocabulary love it, but at the same time I find it very frustrating.
Do we need the idea of eternal punishment for masterbation?
@@iraborpeter what in (add a god's name here) is this have you gone crazy. Someone go and checks he's ok please.
Who is going to be here for 200 years . Keep stealing from the poor and the lovers of them self and money . What do you expect god this people heat you so much
Oh please.
the title is skewed.....you have the wrong title.....if God is holy.....try this one and see if you have any questions...
I think the question of eternal torment points to the great failure of religiosity, it almost begs you to excuse the inexcusable and forces you to diminish the inherent empathy that humans have for one and other in favour of a foreign morality that is not native to us. Believers do this consciously in order to maintain their faith position because for them the alternative would be too much to bear. Atheists on the other hand do not suffer from this anomaly.
Eternal torment is a concept that merged into Christianity from pagan folklore and greek mythology.
@@Mickyboi1 Ok, so you aren't a Catholic...
Search for Our Lady of Fátima and Hell. Search for the Miracle of the Sun and how unbelievers had to believe what happened there.
Well said, tho I wouldn't call it a great failure of religiosity, since Confucians and Daoists would agree with your statement. Your critique for instant is also found in Mengzi as well as other Confucian philosophers in regard to morality that does not conform with human reality. Many Confucians were worried about what they saw as systems of ethical norms too far removed from our actual psychological dispositions.
Tho I wouldn't even call certain religions of preaching foreign morality, it is not so much a product of religiosity, as it is humans losing their understanding of culture forms and the Mean of what it is to be human.
@@IotaEtaSigma Why not search your own morality instead, There is not record of the Sun bouncing around in the sky according to the observatories around the world which would confirm it is the result of mass optical hysteria, the same only happened in recent years in Ireland with a dancing statue. Think about it, which is more likely, an optical wobble or that the best a divine entity could do to communicate is wobble.
Sin keeps us from drawing near to God. He is too pure to behold evil.
"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 6:23)
We don't go to Hell. We choose to go there. It's part of taking responsibility for your own behavior...people don't like the idea of "hell" because we live in a society where increasingly people look to blame others, alcohol, drugs, etc for their choices. Love does not require approval. Loving someone doesn't mean you have to approve of everything they do. Toxic, selfish, destructive or violent behavior always has consequences either in this world or the next.
If you ever had kids, would you create a torture chamber and allow them to go there for not loving you enough, or would you do everything in your power to stop them?
@@tomandrews1429 He did try to stop us. But we make the choice to reject Him. The proper analogy to what you said would be that the kids chose to leave the house. The Father says, "You can live here!" and they say, "I do not want to."
We aren't kids, we are adults. God provided the tools to avoid hell, we choose to either use those tools or not. We need to help ourselves and each other but ultimately our salvation is our own individual responsibility. Make wise choices, raise resilient faith-filled and faith-knowledgeable children, teach them how to make wise responsible choices. They may go off the path for a while but a strong foundation nearly always leads them back.
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker You need to be careful with the premise you just laid out. I'm not saying it's wrong, but it can be misunderstood to mean we can save ourselves. We cannot. We can only cooperate with the salvation. If we choose not to, then we go to hell. But we must maintain that we cannot save ourselves outside of God's grace. (I know this is the point you are making, hence your "God gives us the tools" and whatnot, but it's good to clarify this).
@@Arkangilos St Paul says 'work out your own salvation with fear and trembling'. The Catholic Church has the path lit for us focus on the path. It is all laid out there to help us but we being fallen humans often want to do what we want to do and too busy pointing out what each other or the "church/leaders" are doing. Too often we are like the Israelites complaining about the journey and our leaders and the food, getting distracted instead of focusing on the path to the destination.
I consider myself quite a devout practicing Catholic and have done for many years now. I believe 99.9% of the churches doctrine but i draw the line at the doctrine of An eternal hell of literal fire which is drawn from Greek mythology and i see it as borderline blasphemous.
My reasoning is both scriptural and philosophically based, to anyone who believes this i ask how do you sleep at night? When I believed in this i spent the majority of my day thinking about how most of my loved ones and friends would ultimately end up there for something which is seemingly out of our control (unbelief is out of our control for many different reasons).
Even more importantly however to support my belief is on the basis of the holy scriptures and gospel (good news) itself. All these scriptures and many many more directly state how all flesh shall be saved (1 Timothy 4:10, Romans 11:32, Romans 5:18, Titus 2:11, Luke 3:6, Ephesians 1:10, 1 John 2:2).
You might reference Jesus talking about “eternal fire” And “eternal punishment”, the answer to this is three fold;
-Firstly Jesus spoke only in parables to the peoples so why here is he suddenly talking literally?
-Secondly, fire everywhere else in the bible fire is symbolic for purification (purgatory?)
-And lastly the word ‘eternal’ was translated from the Greek ‘Eonian’ which means pertaining to an age to come, this makes even more sense in light of “eternal punishment” which is more accurately translated from the original Greek as ‘Eonian Chastisement’ (the age of chastisement, Chastisement meaning a punishment with aims of correction).
Many of the early church fathers also believed in universal reconciliation- ie Gregory of Nyssa, Clement of Alexandria
My belief does not take anything away from the just punishment and shame those who wilfully sin and reject Jesus will face but rather the never ending hell we have come to believe in (which closely mirrors that of greek paganism) is simply not true.
There are a million other reasons and arguments for this view but this is the bread and butter.
I just wanted to put this out there and I don’t expect a positive response persae as I’ve certainly found the idiom ‘hell hath no fury like a Christian challenged on the existence of hell’ to be true amongst both Catholic and especially protestant circles, some of whom almost idolise hell...
Further, to expand on my first part, if you reject one Dogma you cease being a Catholic by faith because you do not hold the Catholic Faith, you reject it. You become a protestant. This doesn't say you don't belong to the Church, you are still juridically a Catholic, but that is not the same as being Catholic by Faith.
As to the Saints that rejected it, they did not. It was officially condemned *after* the idea was put into question. So while they said maybe, the Church responded, "No."
You disagree with Christ? www.catholic.com/qa/where-is-hell-mentioned-in-the-bible
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker The arguements made here still apply to all the scriptures in the article!
The ‘Eternal’ we see in todays bibles was taken from the word ‘Eonian’ which means pertaining to an age. ‘Punishment’ is more accurately translated from the greek as ‘Chastisement’ which insinuates correction.
@@inthelionsden1 Chastisement does not insinuate correction. It is often *used* for correction, but it does not mean correction. It means beating. As for why "ages" are used, they say "ages upon ages" and "always and always" and "ever and ever" which means eternal.
“Masturbation is a mortal sin”? And everybody is just fine with the psychological damage these guys- for that matter, the church- are doing to countless innocent people? And these are the guys who say things like, “wake up, sheeple, and stop wearing your mask?” If there is a god of any sort at all, it’s a total jerk for allowing so much damaging distortion in its (many) name(s) throughout history.
So... It's a mystery
Matt, you were right to feel uncomfortable when you described the (fictional) youth who masturbated while be aroused watching netflix going to hell. I'll sound like a Protestant here (so be it), but nowhere in the Bible is this mentioned. And also, this is a 'practice' that a vast majority of people do. God will send to hell (eternal torment for ever and ever) for that? Then hell will be very full. Why isn't (for example) meanness and slander and dishonesty considered a mortal sin? I'm sorry, but this topic (which young people seem to talk about a lot) just doesn't equate with a God who is just AND loving.
The moment I reconsider my rejection of faith, one that I, with great agony, walked away from 15 years ago (I was a pastor, for what it is worth)...I just watch a video like this. Then I'm reminded of the morality, or lack thereof, that I left behind. I mean this not as a personal attack, but rather a statement of fact. I'm quite sure you you, the owner of the channel, have not truly considered the moral ramifications of this belief to its full extent.Please consider this with an open mind.
To claim your god isn't responsible for sending people to hell, when he alone created it, you're attempting in vain to square the circle - plain and simple. Under no definition of "morality" akin to anything we can understand would the architect of abject horror be let off the hook for billions of people being subjected to it by "their choice", when their choice in this instance (a) is often not even possible to make; (b) is based upon a book riddled with errors and contradictory narratives about the self-same deity demanding your allegiance (square, for example, a concise Easter narrative using all four gospels - you cannot), and (c) excludes even the 'mention' of hell (and no, the 'pit' isn't hell) for thousands of years to his so-called chosen people. The latter should concern you greatly: that the "prince of peace" ushered in a far greater punishment for non-allegiance than any of the so-called prophets prior. Did Yahweh not think this important enough to opine upon during, say, the authorship of the Pentateuch? Apparently not. Ask yourself why.
You seem like a decent chap who enjoys contemplation, so I'd highly encourage you to dig into the perceived morality of this belief a bit further: that of an infinite punishment for what amounts to thought crime; the lack of belief. Do so considering that one cannot force oneself to believe anything. I challenge you to stop believing in water...or begin believing that Vishnu lives in my basement. Neuroscience has elucidated the fact that we don't even control our choices to begin with, with "decisions" made milliseconds before we consciously perceive them. On top of this, you did not choose your parents, your genetics, nor one cell in your brain. You were not given the mind of a psychopath, or one hopes. Nothing you are doing is of free will - not by any reasonable definition of the term. Yet your god uses 'that' to condemn trillions to, not just banishment, but eternal torture? Your deity could have made this simply "non-existence". After all, being without his presence would surely be considered a punishment if he exists. But he did not. He chose the worst possible outcome. "Could" a being defined as "love" even consider such a choice?
A simple litmus test if you will: under what condition would you willingly allow "anyone" to make such a choice, in your words? Anyone at all? Hitler? A child rapist? Anyone? With the understanding that you would have to witness the consequence of this choice yourself forever, along with its effect on every one of this person's innocent relatives? Punishment, yes. Eternal torture? Think carefully.
Now, apply this same standard to your own children. What would any of them have to do in order to justify, again in your words, "allowing them to choose torture forever" rather than to live under your roof? What sin would they have to commit to compel you to allow them to be harmed 'at all', let alone set afire for all of time?
The latter is precisely what your god supposedly allows, not the former. Yet a moral person would object to the former as well. And if you object to either, you are more moral than your god - and any redefinition of the term, or appeal to "mystery", will not solve your dilemma. Therefore, your deity is not 'love', as no definition of love, outside the constrains and contortions placed on it by religion, would allow for such cruelty.
However, if Yahweh is examined through the lens of what he actually was - a tribal war god of the early Hebrews, created from earlier gods (El, exposed to the Hebrews during Babylonian captivity) and an evolution from a polytheistic deity to a monotheistic one (albeit in a convoluted fashion that no one can really clarify) - and consider the cruelty of those generations of people, commands to commit genocide and employ slavery make perfect sense. Even the integration of hell by later Hellenized authors, all of whom were well-versed in the concept from their Grecian literary backgrounds, is understandable. But that leaves your deity on the pile of mythical beings, and trust me: I get how much that sucks.
Perhaps that's not the conclusion you'll come to, and that's fine. But hopefully you'll, at the very least, examine why you continue to endorse doctrines that are blatantly immoral. Thanks.
1:10
"...how God could 'send us' to hell."
...As though God were the front office of a Major League Baseball team SENDING us....to the minors??
Free will!
IF we use our free will to obey The Father we obey the first commandment love God The Father Jehovah with all heart. If we dont even know him well..
@@nejileesansenpai More like God won't force himself with someone who doesn't want him. Or something like the gates of hell are locked from the inside. Now, what qualifies as denying God is another conversation.
I'm going to have to let this answer wash over me a few times. So much more there than our usually binary, short and sweet responses to try to contemplate this. Thanks for clipping it.
If God was so loving why let children suffer? He seems awful absent. That's why I no longer buy it.
Go ahead and listen to my first video! Might help you out.
I struggle with sins of the flesh and it is HARD to quit. It seems impossible at this point. It's been 13 years.
Any time you start to lust mentally, push the thought out and think about something else. It takes practice but eventually will become like a habit.
@@AConsumer999 But a good one. I say this as someone who struggles with it. The fact is we have to do whatever it takes to get over it. Either pushing through it with prayer (as one of my priests once told me, keep a rosary by your bed and grab that instead), getting rid of any source that can lead to it (even if that means no TV, Netflix, or free reign of internet), or going for runs.
@@AConsumer999 it works.
Pray to St.Joseph and St.Jude
@@gicraft6461 Along with St. Mary of Egypt and St. Mary Magdalene, both were in the same boat and overcame it :D
This is a ridiculously antiquated way just to say yes we have hormones . Religious or not, this the absolute wrong man to talk to about them fir a few reasons !
What do you mean by "we have hormones"?
If my neighbor has a beautiful wife seeing her will inevitably activate some neurochemical mechanism in my body that will make me desire her. Should I rape her and blame it on that neurochemical mechanism?
Each desire or fear that we have triggers something in our body. It doesn't mean that we can blame our actions on biology.
Is there a vaccine for religion yet?
Kinda hoping for the same for atheists and heretics.
@@Arkangilos But you are a heretic too, dear friend.
@@AndJusticeForMe Citation, please. Give me one dogma of the Church I reject.
@@Arkangilos I’m talking about other faiths. Muslims think you are a heretic. Calvinists think you are a heretic. Presbyterians think you are a heretic. Methodists think you are a heretic. On and on and on. Oh, yes, hell awaits you too. That’s the beauty of the religion racket...everyone is a heretic.
@@AndJusticeForMe When were they founded?
What definition are we using?
What authority do they have to call other Christians heretics?
Where are you having this conversation?
I don’t believe “truth is what you think it is.”
The religions you mentioned were founded centuries after the Church specifically embracing heresies already defined by the Church. As a Catholic, who follows Catholic definitions, follows the one truth, it doesn’t matter what they think because they are literally heretics.
First thing you have to realize is that god isn't love, he is unquestioning obedience, disguised within the false pretense of love.
If you removed the verses that specifically state god is love, and then read the story, you could never come to the conclusion
that god is love. I'm sorry, but that is just how it is.
If there was such a god, with the attributes Christians state their god has, he would be farther advanced than a human being from
a one cell amoeba, now ask yourself... if you could create a one celled amoeba, could you in any way shape or form hold it accountable
to being a one celled amoeba? And not living up to your standard/greatness?
Of course not, it's just a ridiculous thought.
"Thus says The Lord: Behold, the corrupt doctrines of the churches of men have crept into every corner; near and far, the doctrine of hell and eternal torment is embraced by the people.
Yet I tell you the truth, this doctrine is a loathsome spot on every garment worn in the name of truth! A detestable wrinkle within the tapestry of My glory! A horrible interwoven thread by which those who call of themselves Christian pollute My name and mar My image before the people, propagating that which came forth from the mouth of the dragon!
THIS DOCTRINE IS EVIL! And must be opposed by all who have received the love of the Truth. For I have indeed spoken to this generation, even as I have spoken in all times past. For I AM THE LORD, The Light in whom there is no darkness at all."
~
"Thus says The Lord: Little flock, how is it you say within yourselves the way of The Lord is not equal? How is it you feel as though upon this servant I have poured a bounty, yet you remain desolate?
Beloved ones, by whose power were you called forth into existence? To whose joy were you created? By whose favor were you born into this world by way of water and blood? Therefore, again I say to you, who you choose is everything. For I do not withhold My love, yet on account of your flesh you do always step backward.
Consider the woman who touched My robes and was made whole. Tell Me, how is it that she received and you do not? Was she so highly favored, that she should receive and you should not? Beloved, come close and walk beside Me, for you are indeed highly favored! And all who grab hold of Me shall surely share in all that is Mine.
Little flock, My ways are equal, yet the ways of My people remain unequal. For I have indeed poured out My life for you, yet each one must decide how deeply they drink. Do you not see? My blessings are equal for all who receive of My blessings, and My grace sufficient for all who trust in Me.
Thus among those who come to Me, one is not favored over another, nor is My love bestowed by measure. Rather it is you who receive by measure, resisting on account of all these deceitful weights, trust which remains altogether lacking.
Therefore do not confuse My love with the calling I have purposed for another, nor compare the gifts of the Spirit with The Blessing. For those I have called to serve shall indeed be given gifts, each in accordance with their faith and My will. And those who receive the greater gifts shall also bear the greater burden, even in the heat of the Day.
Therefore, again I say to you,
The Lord’s ways are indeed equal,
Yet the ways of men remain unequal...
Yet those who grab hold of their First Love
With all their heart, with all their mind,
With all their strength and with all their soul,
Shall never go hungry, nor shall they thirst anymore;
Nor shall the heat of the noonday
Sun do them any harm...
Yea, even all their tears shall be wiped away
In the house of The Lord."
trumpetcallofgod.com