To Christians - The Pope says there's no hell, what do you think?

[Shadow Link]

But the problem is when the centralized church teaches false things. Which the RCC has done for centuries. Thus, it's losing members not for the reasons many think. There are many believers who seek Truth, and not the manmade version that the RCC teaches. Coupled with how badly they handled the sex molestation cases with their priests, they look like a Church that wants to control people instead of love them.

IDK. Some might say, "The Lord works in mysterious ways"

 

[Shadow Link]

IDK. Some might say, "The Lord works in mysterious ways"

Not meaning, He approves of all the wrongs that were done either.

 

[Shadow Link]

Not meaning, He approves of all the wrongs that were done either.

Simply 'separating the wheat from the chaff' is what I'm really getting at.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Why the U.S. Catholic Church Has Lost More Members than Any Other Major Denomination

This is a really insightful article as to why the RCC is on the decline. I think that people have woken up to what the RCC is REALLY about, and it's not about the teachings of Jesus, it's not about compassion, it's about controlling the masses with rules, and usurping the teachings of the Bible, and pretending that without the Papacy, no average believer could ever begin to interpret the Bible correctly. This pope is trying to save the falling numbers, but by trying to reinvent a new Catholicism. I'd have more respect for him if he stepped down and denounced the RCC, instead of trying to change it into a new faith. If you change it, it's not Catholicism, anymore. lol

It's not the peoples', i.e., members', fault; it's the leaders', at least those who knowingly mislead. The Pope may not even be aware of the contradictions....aren't they trained more into the Catechism & 'Early Church Father' writings? And after an Organization has been in existence for almost 2,000 years, most -- even the top leaders, maybe -- wouldn't think of questioning its teachings, believing the Bible teaches those things. IDK.

I've always been an avid Bible reader, way before I was a JW.

The only substantive contradictions I've noticed, are between religious tenets and the Bible, and between different translations of the Bible....none within the oldest Greek and Hebrew manuscripts of it, and what those writers meant to convey.

But, getting back to being misled: remember what Jesus said to God, right before He died? "Father, forgive them, because they do not know what they are doing." -- Luke 23:34.

Also, Stephen said something similar, @ Acts of the Apostles 7:60. (BTW, the last sentence in that verse tells us, "he fell asleep in death." Interesting, huh?)

Still, as Jesus said @ John 17:3, it's important to make the effort to 'come to know Jehovah God and Jesus'; and knowing what the Bible really says, can stimulate us to do that, out of love.

 

[pearl]

As a leader of the faith, regardless of what I or anyone else thinks, he still has a responsibility to follow the tenets of Catholicism.

3. The images of hell that Sacred Scripture presents to us must be correctly interpreted. They show the complete frustration and emptiness of life without God. Rather than a place, hell indicates the state of those who freely and definitively separate themselves from God, the source of all life and joy. "To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called ‘hell’" CCC
The opposite of being loved by God is not damnation, it is nonexistence, in other words, 'to disappear'.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What a great post, and thank you for sharing this. But, how about passages like this? What to make of these:

Revelation 20:14 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.

Revelation 20:10 10And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Revelation 19:20 20But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.


Are they merely metaphors for something else?

Regarding torment, you might find this comment enlightening(?):
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia observed: “Probably the imprisonment itself was regarded as ‘torment’ (as it doubtless was), and the ‘tormentors’ need mean nothing more than jailers.” (Edited by J. Orr, 1960, Vol. V, p. 2999).

The excerpt was taken from this article, which provides other related links within the article (also, note the similar material on the left side, and the last paragraph has a link to the 'Rich Man and Lazarus' parable): Torment — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

If you have any questions, please ask!

Take care!

 

[roger1440]

Obviously the Pope hasn't met my ex.

 

[InChrist]

The pope is not my source of truth.

 

[metis]

But the problem is when the centralized church teaches false things.

What may be "false teachings" is highly subjective since almost all teachings are unfalsifiable. If I say that our universe was constructed by 1001 deities all working together while whistling "Dixie" out of their butts, prove me wrong?

 

[Estro Felino]

What may be "false teachings" is highly subjective since almost all teachings are unfalsifiable. If I say that our universe was constructed by 1001 deities all working together while whistling "Dixie" out of their butts, prove me wrong?

What @Deidre means, I guess, is that the absolute power that characterizes the Papacy (and the Vatican) is turning out to be a bit obsolete and shows its collateral damages.
Rather than relying on Pope's infallibility, the dogmas should be discussed by an assembly of prelates, so people would understand when something is pronounced ex cathedra and when it's not.

Besides people ignore how weird Pope Bergoglio's speeches can be. The 90 % of homilies and sermons are not translated, and often are full of meaningless sentences, contradictions, pure deliriums...
that's why in Rome many people don't like him that much.

btw....here is one of the incriminated videos

Spoiler

 

[metis]

What @Deidre means, I guess, is that the absolute power that characterizes the Papacy (and the Vatican) is turning out to be a bit obsolete and shows its collateral damages.

A Pope does not have absolute power, neither over people nor over the theology of the church. People are free to come and go, and even when using "ex cathedra", the bishops and cardinals must be consulted and must be justified in its explanation.

Rather than relying on Pope's infallibility, the dogmas should be discussed by an assembly of prelates, so people would understand when something is pronounced ex cathedra and when it's not.

See above. When he does speak ex cathedra, which I believe you know is quite rare in church history, it is passed on to the laity with explanations as required by Canon Law.

Besides people ignore how weird Pope Bergoglio's speeches can be. The 90 % of homilies and sermons are not translated, and often are full of meaningless sentences, contradictions, pure deliriums...
that's why in Rome many people don't like him that much.

I don't know how many aren't translated, but he is very coherent, let me tell ya. My wife speaks fluent Italian since she was born and raised there, and she has no trouble understanding him at all. She thinks the most of him, thus returning to the church after leaving because of the pedophile scandals.

Also, those that tend to be less enthused are the conservatives, including a fair number of bishops.

BTW, may you and your family have a Most Blessed Easter.

 

[Deidre]

What @Deidre means, I guess, is that the absolute power that characterizes the Papacy (and the Vatican) is turning out to be a bit obsolete and shows its collateral damages.
Rather than relying on Pope's infallibility, the dogmas should be discussed by an assembly of prelates, so people would understand when something is pronounced ex cathedra and when it's not.

Besides people ignore how weird Pope Bergoglio's speeches can be. The 90 % of homilies and sermons are not translated, and often are full of meaningless sentences, contradictions, pure deliriums...
that's why in Rome many people don't like him that much.

btw....here is one of the incriminated videos

Spoiler

I like this answer lol

That’s what I meant plus I find that the RCC adds and subtracts what it feels is appropriate and creates its own teachings, Jesus is sort of pushed aside. As an ex Catholic, it seems like the RCC wants to be the one being worshipped and it stands in the way, as if you need the RCC to gain access to a relationship with God. If you follow every rule and holy day of obligation, you’ll be in good standing in God’s eyes. That’s a false teaching. But brainwashed Catholics will keep dutifully believing that they need to follow the Church to get to God. I used to be one of them.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Did Pope Francis say there is no hell? Not quite, the Vatican insists

We read the words hell and hellfire in the King James and Douay versions.
When the word Gehenna was translated into English as hellfire that put the flames in hell.
Gehenna was just a garbage pit where things were destroyed forever and Not kept burning forever.
So, Gehenna (hellfire) is a fitting symbol for 'destruction ' as found at Psalms 92:7 the wicked destroyed forever.

As far as biblical hell is concerned that is simply mankind's stone-cold grave for the sleeping dead.
Does anyone righteous go to biblical hell__________
The day righteous Jesus' died, according to Acts of the Apostles 2:27, Jesus went to hell.
If biblical hell was a forever place then Jesus would still be in hell.

Jesus was well educated in the old Hebrew Scriptures which teach sleep in death:
Such verses as Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5 that the dead know nothing.
So, I find that is why Jesus taught 'sleep in death' at John 11:11-14.
So, if the Pope is familiar with the Bible then he knows that there is No burning in hell ( just mankind's grave ) .

 

[Deidre]

We read the words hell and hellfire in the King James and Douay versions.
When the word Gehenna was translated into English as hellfire that put the flames in hell.
Gehenna was just a garbage pit where things were destroyed forever and Not kept burning forever.
So, Gehenna (hellfire) is a fitting symbol for 'destruction ' as found at Psalms 92:7 the wicked destroyed forever.

As far as biblical hell is concerned that is simply mankind's stone-cold grave for the sleeping dead.
Does anyone righteous go to biblical hell__________
The day righteous Jesus' died, according to Acts of the Apostles 2:27, Jesus went to hell.
If biblical hell was a forever place then Jesus would still be in hell.

Jesus was well educated in the old Hebrew Scriptures which teach sleep in death:
Such verses as Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5 that the dead know nothing.
So, I find that is why Jesus taught 'sleep in death' at John 11:11-14.
So, if the Pope is familiar with the Bible then he knows that there is No burning in hell ( just mankind's grave ) .

I appreciate you sharing this, I don't honestly think I ever explored it to this depth. Thank you!

 

[Jean Valjean]

Vesuvio exist. It's a place for cunning girls like magica de hex.

 

[Jean Valjean]

Gehenna. I believe this topic has existed before. Has it not?

 

[metis]

That’s what I meant plus I find that the RCC adds and subtracts what it feels is appropriate and creates its own teachings, Jesus is sort of pushed aside. As an ex Catholic, it seems like the RCC wants to be the one being worshipped and it stands in the way, as if you need the RCC to gain access to a relationship with God. If you follow every rule and holy day of obligation, you’ll be in good standing in God’s eyes. That’s a false teaching. But brainwashed Catholics will keep dutifully believing that they need to follow the Church to get to God. I used to be one of them.

A truly inaccurate post, and just a reminder that I say this as a non-Catholic.

The Nicene Creed, which is the most basic statement of faith for the RCC, is as follows:

I believe in one God,

the Father almighty,

maker of heaven and earth,

of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,

the Only Begotten Son of God,

born of the Father before all ages.

God from God, Light from Light,

true God from true God,

begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;

through him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation

he came down from heaven,

and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,

and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,

he suffered death and was buried,

and rose again on the third day

in accordance with the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven

and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory

to judge the living and the dead

and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,

who proceeds from the Father and the Son,

who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,

who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins

and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead

and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

[2ndpillar]

A truly inaccurate post, and just a reminder that I say this as a non-Catholic.

The Nicene Creed, which is the most basic statement of faith for the RCC, is as follows:

I believe in one God,

the Father almighty,

maker of heaven and earth,

of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,

the Only Begotten Son of God,

born of the Father before all ages.

God from God, Light from Light,

true God from true God,

begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;

through him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation

he came down from heaven,

and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,

and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,

he suffered death and was buried,

and rose again on the third day

in accordance with the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven

and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory

to judge the living and the dead

and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,

who proceeds from the Father and the Son,

who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,

who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins

and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead

and the life of the world to come. Amen.

The RCC believes in 3 gods, and Peter is supposed to be sitting in for one of them, and under ex cathedra, speaks for two others. Mary wasn't a virgin, and the time in the grave was 3 days and 3 nights. The RCC is not holy, and Baptism is not forgiveness of sins One must repent, and confess their sins, a baptism by water is only a physical depiction of being washed from sins. One must be baptized by the "Holy Spirit" (Mt 3:11).

 

[metis]

The RCC believes in 3 gods, and Peter is supposed to be sitting in for one of them, and under ex cathedra, speaks for two others.

Absolutely false as the Church teaches that there is only one God. The Trinitarian concept does not mean nor imply there are three deities.

Baptism is not forgiveness of sins

Acts2[38] And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

One must repent, and confess their sins, a baptism by water is only a physical depiction of being washed from sins.

Which is why the CC has the sacrament of Confirmation.

 

[2ndpillar]

Absolutely false as the Church teaches that there is only one God. The Trinitarian concept does not mean nor imply there are three deities.


Acts2[38] And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Which is why the CC has the sacrament of Confirmation.

The sacrament of confirmation is at around the age of 7. Give me a break. Other than killing their parents and raping their sister, what sin has this 7 year old committed? As for the trinity, if you had received the "Holy Spirit" you would have already known that there is one God, and not three in one. Having been "deceived" (Rev 13:14) you have taken on the "mark of the beast", and have changed the law and the times. (Daniel 7:25) As for your "Peter" and your "Acts", how did John the Baptist baptize? How are you told to baptize in Matthew 28:19? You need to get your stories straight. Are the "tares" baptized, or not? Did you repent at the age of 7, and yet remain a sinner to this day? Does you double mindedness lead your mind to skip a beat or two? You might as well ask the pope for forgiveness and start attending Catholic mass everyday.