True2Ourselves
Already a member? login
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
  
+
Register FAQ A-Z directory Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

True2Ourselves Forums   > Community Topics > Theology  > Life after Death

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-27-2013, 11:42 AM
CatholicCrusader's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,258
Arrow Life after Death


Life after Death

By: Fr. C. C. Martindale S.J.
SOURCE LINK

There is a sort of objection [to the idea of life after death] which, in itself, must be allowed no weight, but which bulks large in popular imagination, because, precisely, from the imagination it arises.

The simplest example is afforded by the catch-phrases, that white robes, golden crowns, and palms form no alluring prospect; and that "if heaven is like that," we don't want it. Only the lazy, or the very tired, like "peace," that is, "inertia." Or again, that no one could spend eternity even in praising God. This implies not only a confusion of thought which suggests that what we like now is effort, fight, growth as such, and not rather the victory, or at least the expression of strength, that is, of personality and life involved in each moment of these; but, a similar reflection into the future life, by means of imagination, of what we are accustomed to in this. We still picture it containing a very sublimated, purified edition of what we judge to be good behavior here; heaven is visioned as the supremest form of churchgoing, and the never-ending praise of God as, after all, the recitation of some interminable psalter. . . .

Is Hell Unfair?

Probably, however, modern instinct recoils less from the pictured happiness of heaven, than from the fiery scenes of hell. . . .What [people] resent is the whole idea of such appalling punishment, and definitely, that it should be called "eternal." In fact, this singular phenomenon is seen. The revolt against Catholic dogma, out of which issued the Protestant sects, included a contemptuous denial of purgatory, but insisted fiercely upon hell: nowadays, those who believe in after-death suffering at all, insist that it shall be purely purgatorial, and it is hell they will have none of. And the ground they take is moral, involving the whole character of human life on the one side, and our very conception of God upon the other; there is nothing in humanity, they would urge, to which hell could be proportionate: punishment which is not medicinal, is in itself immoral; God’s justice no less than his mercy, his power equally with his love, are affronted if we conceive of him as creating, or allowing "hell." Modern minds are not the first to have felt, poignantly, this problem.

"Well, then, however great a sinner, a man cannot deserve that. He doesn't know what he is doing: he is too weak to carry through the good he knows: there is not malice enough in the world to warrant hell. Wherefore God cannot be just, and send a man there; cannot be powerful and wise, if he fail to invent, and neglect to create, a world in which nothing shall make hell possible; cannot be merciful, if he punish at all from ‘vengeance’; cannot be loving, if he can support, in his eternal bliss, the knowledge that souls are damned; cannot be God at all, if he thus makes a world, and fail to make it a ‘success.’ Even the loss of one soul were failure."

Such is the grave and cumulative indictment against a God who sends a soul to hell.

We must state first that it is not revealed how many souls, or what proportion, are lost. Most Catholics would say that we know that Judas is; yet, for the human race, we have no knowledge of numbers or proportions; but that angels are "lost," we know; and if even one "soul" be lost, the problem stands. Our perspective may be shifted, but the fact remains.

Hope for Sinners

Next, it is clear that Catholic dogma equally implies, that if a man be condemned, he deserved to be. The moment we can truly say, he did not know, or he could not help his sin. . . God has said that well first; and if we can see reasons for mercy that are true reasons and not unjust excuses, God sees many more. Sins of passion—well, "weakness" does go far to account for them: sins of pride, ignorance makes them possible. But never shall we permit ourselves to say that man can never do better than he does, or know more than he does. Some culpability survives. But is it enough? Is it incurable? Well, for all that is not quite enough, that is only just rectified, purgatory exists. Even that most appalling thing to see the man whose role in life seems simply to be putrefactive; who seems, passionlessly, to choose just to corrupt innocence—he must know it to be corruption; and it must be innocence—well, even of these I have now and again asked myself whether this be not due to a desire for power grown tyrannical in a man who has become so morally shrunken as to know he cannot exercise power for betterment, but can, by spoiling; and so just spoils, less for love of the spiritual decay he causes, than for love of the sense of causing something—and indeed, something so very vital and hence so great.

The sin may be different from what it seems, and its excuse, if any, where we do not seek for it. The capability of good—perhaps of great good—may still be there. Easier is this realized in those who seem to be lustful irremediably. The power of worshipping true beauty, the capacity for true love is there, or may be, yet the torrential personality is diverted and hurled out upon the parody, the idol.

And perhaps by the tiniest shift of bias, this out-streaming self may be redirected to the true, and the soul saved; for all the while it was seeking, in the distorted caricature, the pure loveliness which it was, in truth, desiring. If we then can guess that, much more can God have knowledge of it; and it grows wholly clear, that, however much God may perchance in justice pronounce sentence on a soul, we never may.

Death-Bed Conversions

Ignorant, then, are they of human nature, and of God, who deride death-bed conversions, as though they must needs be insincere. Who knows what astounding shiftings of the personality may not, at that unique moment, and in unplumbed depths of the self, take place—nay, even, one would say, must take place in the all but discarnate soul, or have the chance of taking place? Foolish are they who sneer at the anxious effort of the Church, and her eager giving of the sacraments even to the seemingly unconscious, or to the hardened sinner if but there be some symptom that his will has become susceptible of their effects; or even, it may be, short of that, you may almost suppose that in the interior soul that divine mysterious recognition and embrace is happening, which by no exterior symptom can express itself.

Here, then, you must remember that the forgiveness of sins is an article of our Creed. Here is no arbitrary condemnation in mid-life; no fatal mechanistic series; no Karma, even. There is only one complete, irreversible soul-suicide, the act of dying with the will rebellious against God’s. After all, man is limited. The soul, I said, has an appetite for the infinite; yet not infinite is the soul. It is conceivable that the soul may so pour itself out into an act of knowledge, that it can do no more; it has become its knowledge; it is its own act; time exists no more for it. So, too, it is conceivable that a soul may, as it were, exhaust itself in an act of will: it has fully expressed itself in its choice; it is that will, then; the soul may make itself what is opposed to God. That gigantic act may indeed occur; it is an evil self; it is its own worst hell.

But this carries us beyond the juridical.aspect of the problem on which these "moral" difficulties are based. From the side of man they disappear if it be recalled that man, if he finds himself "in hell," has put himself there. No Calvinist predestination is ours. "This is the will of God, your sanctification. God wills that all men should be saved."

And on God's side we have to recall that in him all is one—mercy, justice, power, love. Only our limited, inexhaustive, analyzing intellect sets these "attributes" as it were one against the other. He cannot defeat his mercy by his justice, nor justice by mercy; both are knowledge: in all he is being true to himself; his action is his self; he alone is, in the full sense, his self. No deviation from the true right is possible, on his part, without his ceasing to be God. This we know unerringly. Of the moral.aspect of what we know we judge; and in human verdicts is room for almost every error.

We Must be Free to Fail

As I said, the heart of this problem, in all save the one point of eternity, lies elsewhere, and coincides with the wider "difficulty" of evil. Yet this may be suggested: God, we are bound to say, could have created a world where there was no temptation, or where souls should have been so deluged with "grace" that they would never have yielded to temptation. In fact, in heaven, angels and saved souls are free, yet "cannot" sin. However, from our end of the series, I say that men want an effort and a hazardous one, at that.

If they knew that, however slack they were, they yet were certain ultimately to succeed, by some relatively coercive help, then all elasticity, all spring of action would be gone, for many if not for each.

The walls of God's City are high, and the moat deep. Yet even so we demand the escalade, and would resent a crane. "I can slip, I know; I can even try to plunge. . . yet never shall I fail to reach the battlements. . . " I must be free to fail. There will be hours, no doubt, when I feel myself so weary or so perverse that I shall then call on God to save me in spite of myself." I cry with St. Augustine, than whom none has better fathomed the deficiencies of human nature, his own to start with: "Nostras etiam rebelles ad te compelle voluntates": "Even when our wills rebel, Lord, our wills to thee compel." But we shall have chosen that uncoercive violence. We are still supplying the bare minimum of effort.

A False Problem

Is there not here, perhaps, a "false problem"? I mean, one of which the solution would depend on our adequate knowledge of two facts of each of which we know but part. If we try to "reconcile" them, we may be using for that purpose precisely those parts in which the element of reconciliation does not reside. Any reconciliation so effected, would necessarily be illusory and false. Now this problem of God’s having created such a world, "despite" his knowledge that man could and would, in it, misuse his opportunities and nature, concerns two liberties and their interaction: ours and God’s. But not even our own liberty can we truly analyze. Of it we have a direct intuition which is basic and cannot be cast aside. Deny it, and every step forward in life denies your own denial. But it eludes adequate analysis. Still less is the liberty of God to be g.asped by human intellect. It is in our liberty we most resemble God; and continue—baffling paradox—so to resemble him precisely when and because we freely defy him. Here, then, is our human freedom mysterious enough; and there, divine freedom, a full mystery. False is the problem that arises for us from a contradiction between two terms neither of which we fully understand, and indeed between those elements in them precisely, which are those we do not understand. It may then be said that so terribly does God respect this transcendent fact of liberty, even this participated liberty of ours, that his esteem for it outstrips (to put it humanly) his desire even for our happiness, and thus, even a world where liberty has been misused is not a failure.

I Crave Abundant Life

Another less poignant moral problem before I pass on. "Heaven is itself immoral." To do right for reward's sake, is wrong. No. That is nonsense. Right should be rewarded. Effort implies life, and creates a claim for more life. That increase of life is effort's fitting—you may say necessary—reward: By acting rightly, I exist better, and have a greater capacity for good. Good should, then, come to me. Else there is disproportion. I should, then, desire this; seek for more life; earn it; resent the injustice which refuses it. Thus does society itself develop. I am right, then, to act, positively, in view of it. But I may, too, act disinterestedly; do that which shall bring me reward, yet not for that; regretting it, even, in the human area, lest the prospect spoil my "pure intention"; even, lest I be thought to have worked for "pay" alone. Yet not for that should the reward not reach me. I may act, for parent or friend, just for their sake, indignant, bewildered, at mention of "return." Yet reciprocated love, at least, is due. Even if I choose to act, serve, love, in secret, none the less a singular sweetness, a consciousness of betterment ensues. I am the better: I am more "man." The increase of my life, unasked, unsought, has happened. (So with pleasure: I need not act for pleasure, or may subordinate it; but on every increase of well-being attends its "pleasure," and I could only discard that, by destroying life.) But when the result of my good actions is the increase of my share in God's life, I may act as disinterestedly as I please, but I cannot regret or refuse even the result, and in fact must seek it, for he is life.

Christ came to give that "more abundant life" which I by instinct crave. It is my will to do his will: but his will is my salvation. My true self is my saved self: I am my heaven. Suicidal arrogance, to reject this; futility, to elude it; true self-realization, because true self tradition; achievement, because sacrifice; renunciation is a function of desire. I want to love God: therefore, to be united with him; therefore, "to be in heaven.". . .

To this heaven, then, the Catholic is bidden move, through him who is both goal and way, and all the while is life.
___________________________________________________

This excerpt was taken from the anthology God and the Supernatural, published in 1954 by the Catholic Book Club.

About The Author
__________________

"God in his deepest mystery is not a solitude but a family, since he has in himself fatherhood, sonship and the essence of the family which is love"
- Saint Pope John Paul II
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-28-2013, 12:05 AM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,435
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
"Well, then, however great a sinner, a man cannot deserve that. He doesn't know what he is doing: he is too weak to carry through the good he knows: there is not malice enough in the world to warrant hell. Wherefore God cannot be just, and send a man there; cannot be powerful and wise, if he fail to invent, and neglect to create, a world in which nothing shall make hell possible; cannot be merciful, if he punish at all from ‘vengeance’; cannot be loving, if he can support, in his eternal bliss, the knowledge that souls are damned; cannot be God at all, if he thus makes a world, and fail to make it a ‘success.’ Even the loss of one soul were failure."

Such is the grave and cumulative indictment against a God who sends a soul to hell.
I would say it is a defense of God's Perfection that will not consider His Wisdom, Love or Power inadequate in any way. I would say that the concept of eternal punishment is a grave indictment against God, attributing imperfections to Him.

I also believe this view of eternal punishment contradicts the Scriptures which speak of souls dying. If a soul is hopelessly sinful, beyond all redemption, why would God keep it alive? Eternal life is given as a reward, not meted out as a punishment.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-28-2013, 09:21 AM
CatholicCrusader's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,258
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giuliano View Post
......I would say that the concept of eternal punishment is a grave indictment against God, attributing imperfections to Him........
Quite the opposite, it is proof of God's gift of Free Will.

If a person "chooses" to reject God and disassociate himself from God; if a person "chooses" the path of Satan and Evil, God will respect their free-will choice.

Do you think God "forces" people to go to heaven? In the Purgatory thread you were arguing that people are judged by their works. Well, they are also judged by their choices.

You can't have it both ways.
__________________

"God in his deepest mystery is not a solitude but a family, since he has in himself fatherhood, sonship and the essence of the family which is love"
- Saint Pope John Paul II
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-28-2013, 09:53 AM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,435
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
Quite the opposite, it is proof of God's gift of Free Will.

If a person "chooses" to reject God and disassociate himself from God; if a person "chooses" the path of Satan and Evil, God will respect their free-will choice.

Do you think God "forces" people to go to heaven? In the Purgatory thread you were arguing that people are judged by their works. Well, they are also judged by their choices.

You can't have it both ways.
I think you can have it both ways if you allow people to change their minds. Thus the idea of repentance and mercy. Where does God draw the line ending all possibility of change? When the physical body dies? If that's where the line is drawn, then men would have the power to decide who goes to hell if they kill sinners.

Suppose two men who are sinners get in a fight in a bar, and one whips out a knife and kills the other man who goes to hell to burn eternally. Then the killer goes to prison, hears the Gospel and repents. He goes to Heaven eternally? Can that be right? Could I end your chances for salvation by killing you and then get into Heaven myself because you hadn't killed me?

If one person can end another's chances for salvation, that's giving men the power to decide who goes to hell and who goes to Heaven. I do not believe God allows us that kind of power over each other.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-28-2013, 09:59 AM
CatholicCrusader's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,258
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giuliano View Post
I think you can have it both ways if you allow people to change their minds. Thus the idea of repentance and mercy.......
But I am talking about people who NEVER repent, people who reject God with their last dying breath. After that, there is no more chance for repentance.
__________________

"God in his deepest mystery is not a solitude but a family, since he has in himself fatherhood, sonship and the essence of the family which is love"
- Saint Pope John Paul II
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-28-2013, 10:13 AM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,435
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
But I am talking about people who NEVER repent, people who reject God with their last dying breath. After that, there is no more chance for repentance.
Many people don't repent until they hit bottom. Perhaps they have not suffered enough as the result of their bad decisions. I see no reason to draw an arbitrary line at the death of the physical body.

If that is so, why is the sin against the Holy Spirit said to put people in "danger" of eternal perdition?

Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

I read that to mean there is no forgiveness in this life ("never" applying to time just as "ever" does). However we read it, it is saying that the person is not completely condemned without any hope although he will die without being forgiven.

If people's fates are set in stone at the time of death, I also would not see why people are not judged until much later, at the resurrection at the end of the Thousand Year Reign. Why punish them perhaps for thousands of years only to bring them into court later for a trial and final judgment if they're already serving their sentences? What I see is that "death and hell" serve a purpose up to that point. After that, they are pointless and are thrown into the Lake of Fire themselves.

The "first resurrection" is of the saints. It's safe to judge them since God knows the verdict will be favorable. The judgment of others is postponed.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-28-2013, 10:53 AM
CatholicCrusader's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,258
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giuliano View Post
Many people don't repent until they hit bottom. Perhaps they have not suffered enough as the result of their bad decisions. I see no reason to draw an arbitrary line at the death of the physical body..............
You post so many good posts, its amazing to see you so colossally wrong on this one.

You can't repent after death! That's... ..well, that's nuts. If you could, then everyone would, and you would end up with what amounts to Universalism - everyone is saved, period.

I hope Father Harry chimes in on this one.
__________________

"God in his deepest mystery is not a solitude but a family, since he has in himself fatherhood, sonship and the essence of the family which is love"
- Saint Pope John Paul II
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-28-2013, 12:24 PM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,435
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
You post so many good posts, its amazing to see you so colossally wrong on this one.

You can't repent after death! That's... ..well, that's nuts.
Who says?
Quote:
If you could, then everyone would, and you would end up with what amounts to Universalism - everyone is saved, period.
I think most people will be saved eventually. I don't see a problem with that. Every knee will bow, every tongue confess -- and I say with gratitude and adoration, not out of fear. When people actually know the truth, most will accept the Love of Jesus. I'm convinced of it.

I know I can't expect others to accept my experiences as evidence; but I've seen some people in hell who would not listen to me. I saw some people torturing a man once; and they wanted me to join in. Of course, I wouldn't. Then they wanted to attack me but couldn't because I had the Light of God on me. So they tempted me to sin, so I would lose the Light. I was still not tempted. I loosened the man they had been torturing and tried to talk to him. He wanted to stay. He wasn't interested in leaving. He wanted revenge. Now to me that's truly insane. But that's the way it was. Everyone hated everyone else, but they'd form gangs or alliances; and that man figured if he stayed, he'd have his turn torturing the others.

The problem with souls in hell is that generally they lack the proper kind of mind. Existence is like nightmares in which you can't think about what you're doing -- things just happen. There is a very great danger of getting trapped in hell without the mind to remember much except what's going on.

Psalm 6:5 For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?

This is not denying life after death. It is saying the soul (nephesh) in hell is not thinking right. Few people in hell think of God; and if they do, it's to curse Him.

The soul not trained to love God in this life is in sad shape in the afterlife. Yet it is possible to go there and preach. Catholic theology tends to say hell and purgatory are completely different things. You might accept what St. Francis said when he appeared in a vision to . . . I believe it was Brother John. You might believe Padre Pio could minister to souls in purgatory. I see that distinction between hell and purgatory as less final than you.

I will admit there are a few beings in the deepest part of hell that are completely without hope.

Quote:
I hope Father Harry chimes in on this one.
The Orthodox positions are a little vague, I think.

Here is how I see it. The problem with Catholic theology, after they said hell was eternal, was what to say about praying for the dead. If someone was in hell eternally, why were they praying for them? They knew, for sure, that praying for the dead was a correct tradition. So the concept of purgatory came about in the West. Then the concept of limbo evolved, and that is still uncertain. I follow the Jewish tradition on things. I don't see why that model was abandoned.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-28-2013, 12:42 PM
Amadeus's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,171
Default Re: Life after Death

The Life after death is or can be now. That is to say, everyone without Jesus is already dead. When and if we are filled with the Life which Jesus is then we are Alive and no longer dead.

Is there an opportunity to repent after the dirt is thrown on top of the natural body? I won't say nay, but I really cannot see that.

I see that Jesus came down to us, to hell, to death, in order to provide the Way for those of us who would to take hold of Life.

"The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." John 10:10

"And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die..." John 11:26
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-28-2013, 01:56 PM
CatholicCrusader's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,258
Default Re: Life after Death

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
.....You can't repent after death! That's... ..well, that's nuts.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giuliano View Post
Who says?........
I am pretty sure the Bible says so, somewhere. Common sense also says so.

The idea that you can change your mind about accepting God when you are actually standing before God for your judgement is just not credible.
__________________

"God in his deepest mystery is not a solitude but a family, since he has in himself fatherhood, sonship and the essence of the family which is love"
- Saint Pope John Paul II
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Love, Life and Death Gentlewind General Discussions 12 09-27-2010 05:38 PM
Understanding the Old and New Covenants is a Life and Death Issue Gideon Bible Chat 26 04-25-2010 08:11 PM
LIFE vs death PASHA General Discussions 0 05-22-2009 09:37 PM
Your Tongue...The Power of Death and Life Spirit General Discussions 31 03-17-2009 08:21 PM
Why is the power of life and death on our tongue? walkinthespirit General Discussions 2 03-16-2009 10:39 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:05 PM.


true2ourselves
 
 
 

Flashcoms

You need to upgrade your Flash Player.

Version 8 or higher is required.

download from http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29