>(31) If God is just, then if He sends someone to hell, then that person is capable of an act that is infinite in some respect.>(32) God is just.>(33) No created person is capable of an act that is infinite in some respect.>(34) If God is merciful, then He sends someone to hell only if He is unwilling to bestow forgiveness on that person.>(35) God is merciful.>(36) God is willing to bestow forgiveness on every person.>(37) So, God does not send anyone to hell.It is entirely possible that some, even most, human persons end up unendingly separated from God.The belief no one should go to hell forever is based on a false or incomplete view of persons. In many of its versions, it is based on a false or incomplete conception of what knowing and willing are.The problematic premises here are (33) and (36). The problem with (33) is that it is false. Prima facie, it seems plausible that all of our acts are finite limited in the knowledge on which they are made, limited in the love or hatred that motivates them, limited in their effects, and so on. Were we nothing but material animals, this would indeed be the case. But if we are indeed persons, this is not so. A person is someone who has an intellectual power capable of knowing being as such and capable of grasping any being; indeed, we always have some actual grasp on being itself. https://www.amazon.com/Spirit-World-Karl-Rahner/dp/0826406475/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=1-1 Were it not so, we could not grasp any particular being as a being, since we only know something as an F (for any predicate F) if we have some grasp on what it is to be F in itself. Likewise, a person is someone who has an affective power capable of loving and willing goodness as such, and this capability too is always actualized in some way. Were it not so, we could not love anything as a good.
>>41788058To be a person, then, just is to be one who performs infinite, unlimited acts, acts that aim at being itself and goodness itself.To be a person is also to be freely self-determining: I can determine myself to take a stance towards myself, toward particular beings and goods, and towards being and goodness as such. As one who is teleologically ordered toward being and goodness as such, it is my responsibility to come to more perfect knowledge and love of them, to come to see how they are ultimately identical to God, to humbly accept my own inability to achieve knowledge and love of them by my own efforts, and to receive and respond to God’s self-revelation and invitation to union with Himself. I feel this responsibility in my desire to know being and to love and enjoy goodness.Discharging this responsibility this unlimited orientation to an infinite end is up to me. I can choose to live it out, or I can instead aim at some particular being or good as my ultimate end; I can treat some particular thing as if it were being and goodness itself. While it is true that I am ignorant of many details about particular beings and goods, and about being and goodness as such, most of those details are not relevant to discharging my responsibility. It is entirely possible for any cognizant human person to recognize that any particular being or good is not being and goodness as such, not what one ultimately desires. To persist in treating some particular as if it were what one ultimately desires to persist in acting idolatrously, which is what mortal sin or opposition to Christ are is to knowingly persist in rejecting one’s responsibility, to harden oneself in thwarting one’s own desires. To be a responsible, self-determining person is also to be able to bind oneself in some direction, to make a decisive choice for or against some end.
>>41788066By my choices for idolatrous ends, I can bind myself in a way decisively opposed to God. This unlimited choice to oppose the unlimited good merits unlimited separation from (and rejection by) that good, with all the torment that that separation inevitably involves.The problem with (36) is that it is ambiguous, since, as we saw above, ‘willing’ is said in multiple senses. First, to say that God is willing to bestow forgiveness on every person can be understood in the sense that God offers forgiveness and really makes it available to every person, and in that sense, on the Catholic view, (36) https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/sixth-session.htm is true. Second, to say this can be understood in the sense that God actually bestows forgiveness and its salutary effects on every person. In that sense, I hope that (36) is true, but it may be false: if a person definitively determines themselves to pursue a finite, idolatrous end, then they cannot receive God’s forgiveness. Given this distinction, if we accept the first disambiguation of (36), then (34) will be false: God is merciful, but He might send some people to hell even though He is willing to bestow forgiveness on them, since they, by their hardened idolatrous stance, refuse to receive that forgiveness.This view of the possibility of hell only makes sense, I think, on a view where both God and human beings are persons in a full, free, definitely self-determining sense. To make sense of the dogma of hell in this way, we must be persons with infinite dignity, capable of making a free, self-determined, infinite response in relation to the divine persons, who likewise relate to us in free, self-determined, infinite ways.
>>41788073While God eternally knows everything that occurs, God does not determine everything that occurs. For God to create persons on this view is for God to take a risk that created persons will reject His call and will thereby be damned. God creates us not only as His instruments, but as His partners in creation; He not only wants us to be united to Himself, but He wants us to freely give ourselves to Him. Our dignity as persons requires us to have some separation from God, so that we can give ourselves to Him or not; to have that dignity is also to have responsibility, which means that we must bear the due punishment for our sins.Should we reject God, He will, in that case, be able to bring ever greater goods out of that evil, like the good of revealing the lengths of suffering to which His infinite desire for other persons brings Him but it will not be the good of all created persons being saved. God has total compassion on us, extending mercy to all, but this cannot compel us to give ourselves to Him, on pain of logically contradicting the very notions of person and self-gift.For those Christians who hold that God determines everything that occurs in creation (or unilaterally determines the ultimate outcome of the cosmos in all respects), I think that a choice confronts them.On the one hand, if God determines everything that occurs, including our free acts, then I cannot see how an all-just and all-merciful God where justice and mercy are explained as they were above could send someone to hell. If God determines everything that occurs, then it is hard to see how we hold both that God offers forgiveness and salvation to all, but that not all receive it. So far as I can see, a Christian who holds that God determines everything that occurs (by His causal or permissive will) should accept at least all of (34)-(37) that is, he should accept strong universalism.
>>41788078Of course, that whole view would be inconsistent with the strongly personalistic account of persons which I think is the best philosophically knowable view of persons. It would be to cast God’s love as controlling and clingy and, so, not perfect self-giving love.On the other hand, a Christian could accept the Calvinist view https://prts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Canons-of-Dort-with-Intro.pdf that rejects (33) (for the reasons already given) and also (36) in both its senses: God does not even offer forgiveness to everyone. But that view should be rejected on philosophical grounds: it is contrary to divine goodness, since it makes God’s acts arbitrary, and it is contrary to a true view of human freedom. And, of course, the Catholic should reject that view as contrary to how God has revealed Himself, as expressed in Scripture and in the teachings of the Church.What should be held, I contend, is the view I have outlined here, which reconciles and makes sense of what is knowable philosophically about divine and human persons and what has been taught by the Catholic Church. This is a view on which we relate to God not just as effects of a ultimate causal principle who produces creation and draws it back to Himself, but as human persons to divine persons, with all the trust, responsibility, and responsiveness that personal relations involve. We are responsible persons called to the infinite end of deification, but we can grossly misuse that responsibility. This view, along with my answers to the other objections, invites us into the grand adventure that is the Christian life, and which the Catholic philosopher has the privilege to make known.https://journalofabsolutetruth.substack.com/p/7-questions-no-catholic-philosopher
Bump
>>41788058Or, Occam's Razor: God has no empathy for humanityhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0qmkQGqpM8
My crashes with the church™1: Money leaves the home2: Spirits move in3: Dude, you have lots of fear, stop carrying weapons for safety, haha :)4: Please do lots of drugs and fall asleep :)5: Here's some suprise drugs in your milk and water. :)6: Police, this man is schizophrenic because he doesnt pretend to be atheist for the things we tell him to (notice we are the church, but the paranormal doesnt exist now).And finally: Noo, don't do killer martial arts, here's incapacitating backbone magics so you're more pissful. In summary after becoming a gnostic these happen and more. It must be Christian religion...
Christian money doesnt last forever, and you lost your joy expecting to find it, fuck yourselves now, I guess
Proof that the Bible is the word of God:https://truthischrist.com/seven/fcbaptist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Bible-proof.pdf1 Cor 15:3-4: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VRT2FFXntc1 John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."Romans 3:23: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;”Jesus Christ is God who has come in the flesh from heaven. He died as a sinless sacrifice for the sins of the whole world to save you from eternal hell, the punishment for your sins. He was buried, then resurrected and ascended to heaven and will return soon to condemn the world. You can't be justified to God your own way, so do you choose the righteousness of God by receiving Christ? Rom. 5:9: “Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.” Salvation is by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9) in the one, final, effectual sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ (Heb. 10:8-12) dying in your place as a substitutionary offering for sin (Rom. 5:1-10). The blood atonement He made for you is finished, so if you have received the Lord Jesus by faith (John 1:12) in your heart, you're forgiven of all your sins and are saved, once for all; finally and forever. The gift of salvation can't be earned, it is a gift. Rom 10:9: “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."Eph. 2:8-9: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” After you're saved, you are no longer an enemy of God, and nothing will separate you from His love (Romans 8:38-39)
>>41789459Die in a fire and have your corpse pissed on by a rabid dog with aids
>>41788058The Holy Trinity uses fates worse than ceasing to be to keep Evil in check while still allowing free will to exist so that you can identify Him as the source of existence: Satan's endgame is convincing you you are in a simulation even though Simulation Theory still has to be Gnosticism ultimately, and it's Christianity specifically.>>41789467At minimum Nephilim and similar Demons allowed by God to fully pass as Human if they so desire are allowed by God to use the internet like Humans.
Fuck you. Take your terrorism and shove up into the depths of your asshole you piece of shit. I spent 6 years IN hell due to believing in this horseshit. The only place hell exists is your mind.>God is pure love, compassionate, holds no record of wrongs, a peacemaker, gentle, all-wise>this utter perfection would """""supposedly""""" create an unspeakable TORTURE CHAMBER for 99% of His/Her beloved creations, those He/She loves as much as He/She loves Jesus Christ>the greatest, most awesome being ever to exist "would" literally do the worst possible thing anyone could ever do, not for a short while, but forever and ever>pure love can act in a way that's not only unloving, but the direct opposite of love>God can be "not God">if even Jesus Christ sinned once, God "would" send him to """hell""" foreverYou're full of SHIT. The real Jesus never spoke about hell, but about awakening and freedom from suffering.>t. hear from the Gnostic REAL Jesus Christ on a daily basis and have the Holy Spirit in me>you don't
>>41790151I am the last Christian Prophet of Revelations and am in contact with The Holy Spirit on a level no other Christian is.The Holy Trinity has two natures: He is a native of the Spirit World but consciously chooses to be Good Itself. He made Heaven instantly at the beginning of existence to get away from the rest of the Spirit World's native inhabitants, those that consciously choose to be Evil Itself. I now am blessed to hear the voice of The Holy Spirit on a regular basis and He has told me about how He reigned in the native inhabitants of the Spirit World by acting as if He was choosing to be Evil Itself at the beginning of time, and He keeps them and Demons in check by threatening to send them for eternity to an entire reality in the Spirit World where He acts as if He was Evil Itself.Your world view bleeds of naivete. Evil is a literal cosmological force and there are conscious beings that value it. Do you think they should be rewarded for their crimes? That they shouldn't be punished?
>>41790240>a person can actually get this delusional and egotisticalIntriguing. But no, you don't have the Holy Spirit in you by any means, merely the artificial spirit of the demiurge.>Evil is a literal cosmological forceIncorrect. As was revealed to me, evil is simply heavily distorted, disharmonious, negative energy.>Do you think they should be rewarded for their crimes?No.>That they shouldn't be punished?Nobody should be punished, ultimately, because everyone is innocent.>“Evil does not exist. It never has and never will. Ill-will (think about what that phrase is actually saying) exists in many humans [and other intelligent beings], but it is not a diagnosis, it is a temporary distortion of energy. The vast majority of and the root cause of human suffering originates within the mind. For each individual, the great majority of the suffering they experience, and the shadows they carry around with them and project into the world, are facets of their own creation and own largely unconscious choosing.” – Jesus Christ / Higher Self (Personal Revelation)>“People who seriously harm others intently are not evil, but in some sense mentally ill. This again is not a diagnosis, for all distorted energy will be transmuted into pure, harmonious energy. Everyone and everything – no matter where you go on every level of existence – is completely and utterly innocent, as if they were cherubs.” – Jesus Christ / Higher Self (Personal Revelation)
>>41790260>evil is simply heavily distorted, disharmonious, negative energy.>Nobody should be punished, ultimately, because everyone is innocent.As the one The Holy Spirit Himself has identified as the leader of The Christian Church not just on Earth but in the Spirit World and Heaven I have prayed for you. You come across as uniquely youthfully naive.
>>41790275>I have prayed for you.That one always gets my jimmies going. The absolute "spiritual" (if you can even call it that) pride of saying "I... I'M GOING TO PRAY FOR YOU! I'LL PRAY FOR YOU!! LET ME PRAY FOR YOU! WATCH ME PRAY FOR YOU!!" is actually worse and more proud, I'd say, than the Pharisees were on some level.If you're going to pray for me, fucking do it and shut the fuck up about it. No doubt you pray the intentionally incorrect, misleading way anyways, and not the way the true Jesus Christ taught:>"Whatever things you desire, when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you shall have them." – Jesus Christ (The Bible – Mark 11:24)I'd suggest you learn the proper way to pray, and then fucking pray for yourself, you egomaniacal, ignorant ape.
Did you guys know it doesn't actually say that hell is eternal for people who go there? It says hell itself it burns eternally, but when it comes to people? No such specification. It instead says we are destroyed in hell if we're unbelievers. Damned people just get destroyed after some time, it's not forever. Am I misinterpreting this at all?https://biblehub.com/matthew/10-28.htm
>>41790062You're retarded, you grubbed the money and didnt think
>>41790802That's not Hell. That's the second death and like I was saying, you die, that's it. Hell is a place where certain demons live (non abrahamic).
Bunp
>>41788058>It is entirely possible that some, even most, human persons end up unendingly separated from God.Hmmm kind of sounds like thoughts and activity in one's own inner world doesn't it.
>>41791259You are not God
>>41792476Wrong. If I cannot be God I do not want to remain here... the only real question is on what basis is there a system to convince me I am not God. If I made it, what am I seeking to prevent?
>>41792535Take meds Study philosophy and theology Humble yourself
>>41788058sort of read it, but take this line "as it is in itself:" >since we only know something as an F (for any predicate F) if we have some grasp on what it is to be F in itself.since Kant it has been very obvious that nobody can grasp a thing in itself. so i read your syllogism, but this line sticks out to me like a sore thumb, to the extent that i just have to disparage the whole Aristotelian approach to Godhead. that being said, i think a better (32) would be "God is infinite (Omnipotent)," and then just cut the proof off at (33) with "The infinite/Omnipotent cannot be harmed."
>>41792742>Humble yourselfKill yourself.
>>41788058If a person does not ask for his mercy, God leaves him to his fate.
>>41788058>god this, god that>eternal forever hell and tortureyou talking about the christian book? doesn't god destroy death and hell at the end of the book and call it the 2nd death? he throws hostility and the human body away and makes a new world with no suffering where everything is new?
